DUKE UNIVERSITY 


DIVINITY SCHOOL 
LIBRARY 


GIFT OF 


Frank Baker 


CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT, 
“a 


FROM 
BAPTISM IN WATER 
TO 


BAPTISM WITH WATER. 


FROM THE SECOND ENGLISH EDITION. 


PHILADELPHIA: 
PRESBYTERIAN BOARD OF PUBLICATION, 
No. 265 CHESTNUT STREET. 


Stereotyped by SuoTE & 1 
OTC ~ ~ 5 
Printed by Wax. S. Mart 


~~: 


aS ivi AS) 
RES 
PY A 


PREFACH. 


‘Wo ig the author of Confessions of a 
Convert?’ ‘Who is Mr. B.?” “Who is 
Mr. R.?” “Is the book fact or fiction ?” 
These are questions which curiosity may ask, 
but which, for sundry reasons, cannot now be 
answered. 

There is, however, one query to which a 
reply may be returned;—it is this, “Why 
_ have these ‘Confessions’ been published to 
the world?” Not, certainly, because works 
on the main subject to which they relate are 
either scarce or unsatisfactory. Writers, such 
as Edwards, Hwing, Wardlaw, Thorn, Halley, 
and Godwin, have left but scanty gleaning in 
this well-trodden field of controversy for any 
of their successors. But most of their treat- 


(iii) 


iv PREFACE. 


ises are much too long and learned for popu- 
lar use. They are far better adapted to the 
ministers and more reflecting members of our 
churches than to the mass, who have neither 
time nor talent for the study of productions 
so elaborate. The result is, that while those 
by whom they are read rise from the perusal 
strong as proof from Holy Writ can make 
them in their belief of the authority and ex- 
cellence of a practice so ably defended, as 
the number of such readers is comparatively 
small, the effect has been proportionally re- 
stricted. For general benefit, a different 
class of books is essential,—books that will 
interest, while they instruct, and which con- 
tain reasonings “‘made easy” to ordinary 
minds. Such a book the writer of the follow- 
ing pages has endeavoured to produce. But 
whilst, in writing it, he has aimed at popular 
instruction in general, there is particularly 
one class whose special benefit he has kept in 
view—THE YOUNG. Knowing well the means 
often employed to mislead them on the subject 
of baptism, he has been anxious to supply an 
antidote to the arts and sophistries by which 


PREFACE. v 


they are likely to be assailed. Let ministers 
and parents aid him by placing it in their 
hands, and he is assured that it will not be 
without advantage to their youthful charge. 
If some readers are staggered at a few of 
the incidents narrated in the following pages, 
the writer would assure them that he has 
withheld several other circumstances far more 
startlmg than those which are detailed, and 
which might have been confirmed by many 
witnesses, solely because they would supply 
indications of ignorance, superstition, and 
prejudice which would seem incredible. But 
he is persuaded that none, who are acquainted 
with the class of Baptists of whom he has 
spoken, will deem the portraiture he has 
drawn either incorrect or over-coloured. He 
uses the words “class of Baptists,” because 
much of what he has written will apply only 
to a portion of that body; a portion, however, 
by no means small, and one whose sentiments 
and spirit inflict still greater injury upon their 
own denomination than upon those whose 
practice they oppose. But the author is per- 


suaded better things of many others from 
it 


Vi PREFACE. 


whom he differs, and is confident that they 
would repudiate as strongly as he does the 
arguments and proceedings which he has en- 
deavoured to expose. 

No one desires more devoutly than the 
writer the dawn of that day when the question 
of baptism shall cease to vex the church. But 
recent events—especially the formation of the 
“Bible Translation Society” and the “ Bap- 
tist Tract Society,’’ with the speeches at the 
meetings of the one, and the publications 
issued by the other, too plainly show that 
such a period is distant. Under these cir- 
cumstances, Peedo-baptists must defend their 
principles, and, when requisite, expose the 
reasonings and practices of their Baptist 
brethren. And surely this should not offend 
them, even when the same freedom of speech 
is used by others which they claim for them- 
selves. 


PREFACE 


TO 


THE SECOND EDITION. 


THE rapid sale of the first large Edition 
of the “ Confessions,’ and the numerous de- 
mands for it since then which the Publisher 
has been unable to satisfy, justify the author, 
at first in the» preparation, and now in the 
re-issue of the volume. It was penned under 
the conviction that such a work was necessary, 
and with the hope that it might be useful. 
This conviction has been confirmed—this hope 
realized—by the result. 

The writer’s purpose was—by rebuking the 
narrow spirit, and exposing the shallow soph- 
isms, of the class of bigoted Baptists whom 


(vii) 


Vill PREFACE. 


he describes—to guard the young against their 
influence. This design it was impossible to 
accomplish, just because it was impossible to 
state facts and maintain truth without appear- 
ing to be uncharitable and severe. He is not 
surprised, therefore, that a few have censured 
his production. Many of them, however, 
have done so from inconsideration. They 
have overlooked the author’s affirmation— 
that his descriptions applied not to all Bap- 
tists, but merely to a elass of them. No de- 
nomination numbers amongst its members 
wiser or worthier men; but these men know 
how many there are bearing the same name 
whose spirit and tactics are truthfully por- 
trayed in the following pages. Such estimable 
persons, with a few Pzedo-baptists, who live in 
large towns and in pleasant fellowship with a 
select circle of the most intelligent and liberal- 
minded of the various Christian denomina- 
tions, may deem the sketches inaccurate, or 
the reasonings needless, which form a large 
portion of this volume. But a few months’ 
sojourn in some of our rural districts or small 
towns would correct their mistake, and effec- 


PREFACE. ix 


tually cure them of their misapplied charity. 
Were they to witness the unworthy arts to 
which small-minded zealots for “‘ much water”’ 
resort, in order to gain from the young and 
uninstructed a proselyte to their sect, they 
would not condemn but commend the man 
who should expose artifices so dishonourable 
to the denomination they were designed to 
enlarge, and so calculated to injure the cause 
of Christ. 

But the author is aware that his work is 
not mere narration. It is throughout ar- 
gumentative. And though he acquits the 
more respectable Baptists of the spirit which 
he has exposed, he is aware that many of 
them, in common with inferior men, rely 
upon some, at least, of the reasonings 
which he has refuted. At this he may 
marvel, but he has no disposition to do 
more. How some Baptists can be satisfied 
with the support they derive to their sys- 
tem from many of their arguments which 
are answered in the ‘Confessions,’ he 
knows not. They may think the Pzdo- 
baptists “weak brethren,” as too many of 


bs PREFACE. 


them profess to do; but such brethren can 
comfort themselves with the thought that, 
weak as they are, they are strong enough to 
stand against, and to scatter to the winds, 
sophisms of those who smile with self-com- 
placency at their folly. 


CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


PART IL. 
DOUBTS AND DIFFICU TIES. 


My parents were pious, but Baptists of the 
straitest sect. This even a stranger would very 
soon discover, but their children knew it right 
well. I can trace amongst my very earliest impres- 
sions the idea that it was very wrong to sprinkle 
babies, and that the ministers who did so were 
very foolish or very naughty men. Ido not think, 
indeed, that my worthy father and mother ever 
told me this in so many words; but I am per- 
suaded that they, and others who attended our 
meeting, believed as much ; azxd I well remember 
hearing them speak of Peedy baptists as “ weak 


ay 


12 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


brethren,” labouring under a dangerous delusion. 
I am convinced, however, that my parents, who 
were in other respects very kind and charitable, 
would never have spoken as they did against their 
fellow-Christians, had not our minister set them 
the bad example. He was a little man, and rather 
corpulent ; with a stiff gait, a pompous air, a 
round and rubicund face, and a very loud voice. 
He had not been favoured with an academic edu- 
cation ; but possessed considerable natural talent, 
was very confident that he knew what baptizo 
meant, and had been so diligent a student of Dr. 
Gill, and a few other divines of the same school, 
as to be well versed in the principal points of their 
rigid creed. It was his practice, when I was 
young, frequently “to smoke a pipe,’ as he 
phrased it, and to spend an evening at my father’s 
house. These were visits in which I greatly re- 
joiced, because I was then generally allowed to 
“sit up to supper,”—a part of the entertainment 
with which I was much more edified, than I was 
with the graye conversation, for the sake of which 
I was kept out of my bed. 

I cannot now recall much that I then heard, for 
the very good reason that I did not comprehend, 
and rarely regarded it; but I well recollect that 
the subject of immersion was generally introduced ; 


DOUBTS AND DIFFICULTIES. 18 


and there were two passages of Scripture which 
were so frequently quoted—one about the “ much 
water” of A®non, and the other about Philip and 
the Eunuch “going down into the water and 
coming up out of the water’”—that I think I 
should forget my'name sooner than I should for- 
get them. I also retain very vividly the expres- 
sion of our minister’s countenance, and the sudden 
change which would come over it, whenever 
“infant sprinkling” became the topic of remark. 
Often have I observed, in the midst of cheerful 
conversation, or even while he was facetious (as 
he could be), that no sooner was this subject sug- 
gested than his small laughing eyes shot fire, and 
his voice and mein assumed an unwonted, and, as 
I now think, an unnatural solemnity. 

There were some other circumstances in connec- 
tion with baptism which happened during my 
earlier years, and which have forcibly recurred to 
my thoughts since that subject began to engage 
my serious consideration. During this period 
death removed my youngest sister, and my 
parents were most painfully affected by this be- 
reavement. The belief, however, that their de- 
parted babe had entered heaven afforded them 
auch support ; and they appeared to be especially 
consoled by the Saviour’s assurance that “of such 


2 


14 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


is the kingdom of heayen.” At the time this 
seemed to me very natural; but I was not a little 
surprised, shortly afterwards, when an Indepen- 
dent, in a conversation with my father, quoted this 
same passage to prove that infants were suitable 
subjects for baptism, to hear him say that the 
words did not describe infants, but only adults, 
who resembled them in spirit. As the text had 
often been repeated to me when a child, and had 
long been a favourite, I was by no means pleased 
with my father’s new application of it; and for 
this reason I was induced to pay more attention 
than I otherwise might have done to the reply of 
the visitor. He said, I well remember, that this 
could not be the meaning of our Lord, for two 
reasons. The first of these was, that the original 
word translated “of such” neyer meant in the 
New Testament “of those who are similar in 
character,” but always of ‘those who are of the 
same kind or class.” Of the correctness of this 
statement I could not then judge; but since I 
became more competent to examine it, I am fully 
convinced of its truth. The other objection, how- 
ever, I could appreciate ; for it was plain and con- 
vincing even toa child. It was this—that when 
the Saviour said, ‘‘ Suffer little children to come 
unto me, and forbid them not, for of such is the 


DOUBTS AND DIFFICULTIES. 15 


kingdom of heaven,” he assigned in this latter de- 
claration a reason, not for his receiving adults of 
a child-like disposition, but for receiving the child- 
ren themselves. He then asked my father how 
he could suppose that one so wise as Jesus Christ, 
who spake as never man spake, could have ever 
conveyed such a sentiment as this, ‘“ Suffer the 
little children to come unto me, because men and 
women who, like them, are meek and humble, 
belong to my kingdom!!’ What answer my 
good father returned to this reasoning I cannot 
recollect; but I know that, as the conversation 
only confirmed my earliest and sweetest impres- 
sions of these kind words, I was not a little 
pleased that the Independent had, as I thought, 
obtained the best of the argument. I also con- 
sidered it rather strange that, although my pa- 
rents believed that Jesus Christ loved my little 
sister, that he would have taken her in his arms 
had he been on earth, and that he had actually 
received her spirit into heaven, they nevertheless 
refused to present her to God in baptism, as 
my pious uncle and aunt presented my cousins. 
Shortly after entering upon the twentieth year 
of my age, it pleased God, I trust, to discover to 
me the exceeding sinfulness of sin, and to awaken 
in my soul an intense desire after salvation. 


16 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


Most deeply did I then feel that one thing de- 
manded my care, and that it became me to seek 
this with my whole heart. Ordinary pursuits had 
lost their power to please. Old things had passed 
away. ‘Truths, with which I had been theoreti- 
sally acquainted from my childhood, now came to 
my thoughts with all the freshness and force of 
an immediate revelation from heayen. Exer- 
cises, in which I had been wont to engage from 
constraint or custom, were now my comfort and 
my choice. To me no spots were so attractive as 
the sanctuary, and the secret place of prayer; and 
no conversation refreshing, or indeed at all con- 
genial with my state of mind, but such as referred 
to the great truths and spiritual blessings of the 
gospel. The serious reader may, therefore, ima- 
gine that I felt less interest than ever in the fre- 
quent recurrence of the threadbare subject of im- 
mersion, which continued to be one of the most 
common topics of discourse when Mr. B., our 
minister, spent an evening at our house. Indeed, 
I think about that period more was said on the 
subject than usual, because a new minister had 
just been ordained at the Independent chapel, — 
whose preaching had drawn numbers to the place, 
and amongst them a few from our own congrega- 
tion. Having sufficient spiritual discernment to 


‘DOUBTS AND DIFFICULTIES. 17 


discover that there was a better baptism than that 
of water, and being much impressed with the 
solemn conviction, that “neither circumcision 
availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new 
creature,” I began literally to loathe the trite 
theme of which I heard so much, though rarely 
anything that was either useful or new. This 
aversion was strengthened by the heavy condem- 
nation which our pastor frequently pronounced 
upon those who sprinkled infants, and still more 
by the contemptuous and acrimonious tone in 
which it was sometimes uttered. As at that time 
my affections went freely forth towards all who 
loved the Saviour, these hard sayings and harsh 
censures grated most painfully upon my feelings ; 
‘and more than once I withdrew from company 
in which I had not courage to speak, but scarcely 
knew how to be silent. 

I remember being particularly displeased with 
the positive tone in which Mr. B. was accus- 
tomed to affirm, that all upon whom water was 
merely sprinkled or poured were unbaptized ; and 
that to administer the ordinance to any except 
adult believers, was “will worship” and sinful 
superstition. As I knew several intelligent and 
serious Independents sufficiently well to be satis- 
fied that they could not be chargeable with such 

Q* 


18 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


evils, and was confident, moreover, that their 
practice was as much the consequence of careful 
thought and conscientious conviction as that of 
their accuser, I not only shrunk from these un- 
charitable criminations, but, for the first time, I 
began to be conscious of an altered feeling towards 
their author. Assured that many upright Peedo- 
baptists “in these things served Christ,” as sin- 
cerely as their brethren, I concluded with the 
apostle Paul, that they were ‘acceptable to God,” 
and, therefore, that they ought to be “approved 
of men.” 

For some time, as I have already intimated, I 
kept silence. Yet, although my lips were sealed, 
my thoughts were busy; and the conviction 
gradually grew up in my mind, and gathered 
strength from every recurrence of the subject, 
that my dear parents and their teacher were 
attaching to an outward rite a degree of im- 
portance unwarranted by Scripture; and that, in 
their zeal for a sign, they underrated, and some- 
times overlooked, the thing signified. 

But although I had hitherto kept the door of 
my lips, and many times under a strong induce- 
ment to speak, on one occasion my feelings broke 
through all restraints. The conversation had 
turned upon the case of a young lady in the neigh- 


DOUBTS AND DIFFICULTIES. 19 


bourhood, who, it was supposed, sympathized with 
Baptist views, but had recently joined the Inde- 
pendent church. This led to some general and 
very strong remarks against Peedo-baptists, and 
their disregard of God’s ordinance, which could 
only have been justifiable upon the supposition 
that they were doing this wilfully. I had often 
heard such observations before; but having that 
morning been reading the life of Philip Henry, 
whose views on the subject of infant baptism were 
so decided, and so influential, the revolting 
thought crossed my mind that, if Mr. B.’s re- 
marks were well founded, this most eminent man, 
and many others who, though dead, are yet speak- 
ing by their writings and their works, must be 
utterly unworthy of that high place in the records 
and regard of the church in which their character 
and memory have been long enshrined. Under 
this impression, I ventured to ask Mr. B. whether 
a Christian man, who, after an honest, searching, 
and prayerful examination of the Scriptures, had 
come to the conclusion that it was his duty to de- 
dicate his children to God by baptism, ought to 
disregard this conyiction, or to follow it? At 
first he attempted, as I thought, to evade the 
question, and expressed some doubt whether just 
such a case could happen as I had supposed; but 


20 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


when I mentioned the names of Owen, Baxter, 
Howe, Charnock, Watts, Doddridge, Whitefield, 
Wesley, and the Henrys, and referred to some of 
our Independent neighbours, whose praise was in 
all the surrounding churches, he rather shrunk 
from his uncharitable surmise, and said that it 
was not for him to sit in judgment upon them, 
and that to their own Master they must stand or 
fall. Not satisfied with this reply, I pressed my 
point, when he acknowledged that they must do 
what they deemed best. ‘“‘ Well, then,” I added, 
“if they entertain the solemn conyiction that God 
requires them thus to dedicate their children, is 
not this to observe the divine ordinance, to do 
that which is both good and acceptable,—in a 
word, to obey the baptismal command?’ With- 
out a moment’s hesitation, he answered in the 
negative. Tell me, then,” I added, “what is 
that in the service which constitutes its essence, 
and which God chiefly regards? Is it the mode 
in which it is done, or the spirit?” He paused 
for a moment, and then began to speak about the 
signification of the original term. That, sir,” 
I replied, “is a point in dispute between Baptists 
and other Christian bodies, who, with at least 
equal integrity, ability, and learning, maintain 
that the word does not mean to immerse, just as 


DOUBTS AND DIFFICULTIES. 21 


confidently as you contend that it does. Upon 
this question I cannot pronounce; but one thing 
appears to me perfectly plain, that whether the 
Greek word signifies dip, or sprinkle, or anything 
else, a correct conclusion respecting the meaning 
of a disputed term is a matter of very inferior 
importance to that upon which we are conversing. 
Can you believe,” I added, “that a mere verbal 
mistake (supposing it to be one) would vitiate a 
service, most sincerely performed in accordance 
with what is verily believed to be the appointment 
of God? Do you think that the religious use 
of water, in the name of the Trinity, and in the 
spirit of obedience, is not regarded by the Saviour 
as the observance of his institution, simply and 
solely because the element is not employed in 
sufficient quantity, or applied in the most expres- 
sive mode? (an a slight error or informality 
neutralize, and render nugatory, what in all other 
respects would constitute a sacrifice such as must 
be well pleasing to God?” 

In this strain I continued to speak with con- 
siderable warmth and fluency for some time, and 
the good minister sat gazing at me with mute 
amazement. At the close of my appeal, he simply 
said, “Ah! you are young yet, and you will, I 
hope, take a more scriptural view of the subject 


22; CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


as you grow older ;” and then he introduced ano- 


ther topic. I heard afterwards that, on the fol- 
lowing morning, he remarked to my father’s clerk, 
a prim and puritanical old gentleman, and a very 
strait-laced member of the church, that I “was 
not half a Baptist,” and that he feared I “had 
been among the Independents.” 

The effect of this conversation upon my mind 
was considerable. Feeling as I then did the in- 
calculable importance of what was spiritual in 
religion, my soul revolted from a system which 
seemed to me to invest the mere ceremonials of 
Christianity with a value of their own, distinct 
from the purpose they were intended to serve, and 
superior to that state of mind which God regards 
as of pre-eminent worth. And the longer I con- 
sidered the subject, the stronger my conviction 
became that this was a natural consequence of 
Baptists making a single rite the point of union 
with each other, and of separation from the Uni- 
versal Church. I thought, moreover, that I could 
trace the baleful influence of selecting so narrow a 
basis for their ecclesiastical system, far beyond the 
solitary effect which I had noticed. 

But although I strongly disapproved of the 
opinions and spirit upon which I haye been re- 
marking, my conviction that adult immersion was 


DOUBTS AND DIFFICULTIES. oS 


the most scriptural mode of baptism continued as 
yet unchanged. I say “conyiction,” but the 
word “impression” would more accurately de- 
scribe my state of mind; for as I had neither read 
any defence of a different mode, nor carefully con- 
sidered the subject, it amounted to little more. 
Upon this impression, however, I had been al- 
most persuaded to act, and thus to connect myself 
with the church amongst whose members I had 
been brought up. More than once Mr. B. had 
pressed the duty upon my attention, and had 
urged me in the accustomed phraseology to “ fol- 
low the Lord,” by which he simply meant “be 
immersed.” Many other kind friends also yolun- 
teered their advice and exhortations to the same 
effect; and why it was I know not, except from 
the hope that I should succeed to my honoured 
father’s position, who was a deacon of the church, 
and what the good people called “a pillar of the 
place ;” but there was certainly much effort em- 
ployed to get me safely under the water. 

Jus at that time, however, a circumstance 
occurred which not only caused me to hesitate, 
but which gave my mind a new bias, and led me 
first to defer, and finally to decline the religious 
connection I was about to form. At our family 
worship one evening, my father read the third 


24 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


chapter of Matthew, which describes the char. 
acter and baptism of John; and while I listened, 
I was struck, as I never had been before, with 
the fifth verse, in which it is said, “Then went 
out to him Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the 
region round about Jordan, and were baptized.” 
As soon as the service was concluded, I re-opened 
the Bible; and having again read the words, 
“ Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the region 
round about Jordan,” I exclaimed, “ What an 
amazing multitude must John have baptized, and 
what an amount of time and labour must have 
been consumed in immersing them!” On the 
following day the same thought recurred; and 
having read the statement once more, I resolved, 
if it were possible, to ascertain the probable num- 
ber of the baptized, and the time which must 
have been spent in such a service. 

With this design, I consulted, in the first 
place, Josephus, a commentary, and two or three 
other books, for the purpose of ascertaining the 
population of Judea at the commencementf the 
Christian era. But greater difficulties than I had 
anticipated prevented me from obtaining that 
accurate information which I desired. One con- 
clusion, however, appeared to me incontroverti- 
ble,—that, at the lowest calculation, the number 


DOUBTS AND DIFFICULTIES. 95 


eould not have been less than,a million and a 
half. Waat proportion of these might have 
been baptized could, of course, be only a matter 
of conjecture; but when I considered the great 
popularity of John, and the strong and universal 
terms by which the numbers are described, I 
was convinced that the total could not be less 
than one-third of the people, nor under half a 
million. 

Having satisfied myself upon this point, I pro- 
ceeded to compute the period which must have 
been consumed in their immersion. From having 
frequently witnessed the process, I knew that 
baptism by this mode could not be administered 
to an individual, with suitable deliberation and 
gravity, in less time than two minutes, and, with 
the utmost despatch consistent with decorum, that 
more than thirty could not be immersed in an 
hour. Assuming this to be the average rate at 
which John performed the service, and supposing 
that he thus spent ten hours of every day, I was 
conducted to the conclusion that he might bap- 
tize two thousand weekly, or about one hundred 
thousand in a year; from which it was evident 
that, had he spent no part of this time in travel- 
ling, preaching, or other employments, but con- 
tinued almost without intermission in the water, 


3 


26 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


he must have devoted five years of labour to this 
single work! I was confounded at the result of 
this calculation; for I knew, from previous 
thought and reading, that his public ministry 
could not have exceeded a year, and was probably 
restricted to a still shorter period. 

This inquiry shook my previous faith in the 
divine authority of immersion; and it also re- 
called to my recollection a conversation I had 
heard, a few months before, between my uncle 
and my father on the subject of John’s baptism, 
in which the question was proposed, whether, sup- 
posing that John’s disciples were immersed, they 
submitted to this process in their usual dress or 
naked,—or, if not, whether they had brought 
changes of raiment with them for the purpose, 
and had constructed sheds, or pitched tents on the 
banks of the river, in which they could privately 
prepare for the service. My excellent parent 
perceived the difficulty in which he would be in- 
volved by adopting either of these hypotheses ; 
and therefore like the Pharisees, when pressed 
with another perplexing question respecting the 
same baptism, he prudently replied that he could 
not tell. My uncle, however, would not be satis- 
fied with this evasion, and proceeded to show 
that each of the suppositions was equally impro- 


DOUBTS AND DIFFICULTIES. 27 


bable. He added, moreover, what struck me at 
the time, that as there must have been women as 
well as men who crowded to John’s ministry, 
nothing could be more unlikely, more contrary to 
the usage of the country and the people, or more 
revolting to the feelings and habits of Eastern 
females, than to have consented to be publicly 
plunged by a man in the presence of a gazing 
multitude. 

Shortly after this, Mr. B. called at my father’s 
house; and having pointedly asked me why I 
lingered on the threshold of the church, I deemed 
it my duty candidly to confess the perplexities in 
which my thoughts had been recently entangled. 
These, however, he ascribed to “carnal reason- 
ings ;” and questioned whether such doubts had 
not come from the‘great deceiver. I did not feel 
very much flattered by these explanations of what 
I believed to be the sincere operations of an up- 
right mind; nor was I convinced, when he at- 
tempted to remove the doubts which I had sug- 
gested, and to settle the point for ever, by dog- 
matically declaring, whatever others might say to 

“the contrary, that the word baptizo always meant 
to dip, and that therefore John could have ad- 
ministered the ordinance in no other way. I was 
the less satisfied with this summary mode of dis- 


28 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


posing of my difficulties, because I was aware that 
my minister, notwithstanding the oracular style 
and sonorous tone in which he mouthed the term 
‘“‘baptizo,” was yet profoundly ignorant even of 
the Greek alphabet. 

As I felt myself (though not altogether igno- 
rant of the original language of the New Testa- 
ment) nearly as much disqualified as my pastor 
for the settlement of a point upon which profound 
scholars differed, by any reference to Greek 
authors, I simply expressed my surprise that he 
should speak so confidently on the subject; and 
added, that “if the original word always meant 
what he had affirmed, one way by which his 
opinion might be tested, would be to translate 
every passage where it occurs in accordance with 
his theory.” By this process, I suggested, an 
unlearned reader, such as myself, (for I did not 
offend the worthy man by using the plural pro- 
noun,) might form some idea of the fitness, at 
least, of such a signification. I proposed, there- 
fore, that we should select a few passages, and 
substitute the words “dip” and “dipping” for 
“baptize” and “baptism.” To this he yielded his 
assent. But he did it so reluctantly as to convey 
the impression to my mind, that he was apprehen- 
sive the result would not be exactly what he de- 


DOUBTS AND DIFFICULTIES. 29 


sired. I resolved, however, to apply the test; 
and having taken a concordance, I turned to 
seyeral texts, and translated them in the new 
style. A few of these I remeniber, and will here 
repeat. “I indeed dip you with water unto 
repentance; but he that cometh after me is 
mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to 
bear: he shall dip you with the Holy Ghost, and 
with fire” “John did dip in the wilderness, 
and preach the dipping of repentance.” “TI 
have a dipping to be dipped with; and how am 
I straitened till it be accomplished!’ “The 
dipping of John, was it from heaven or of men?” 
“The dipping which John preached.” “ And 
he said unto them, Unto what then were ye 
dipped ? And they said, Unto John’s dipping.” 
“Jesus said unto them, Ye know not what ye 
ask: can ye drink of the cup that I drink of, 
and be dipped with the dipping that I am 
dipped with?” “Know ye not that so many 
of us as were dipped into Jesus Christ were 
dipped into his death? Therefore we are buried 
with him by dipping into death.” “ And were 
all dipped unto Moses in the cloud and in the 
sea.” “For by one Spirit are we all dipped 
into one body.” “Else what shall they do who 
are dipped for the dead, if the dead rise not at 
3% 


30 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


all? why are they then dipped for the dead?” 
“As many of you as have been dipped unto Christ 
have put on Christ.” 

As I thus read these passages, the conviction 
came upon me with irresistible force that the ori- 
ginal term could not bear the meaning which the 
Baptists attempt to fasten upon it; and when I 
had concluded, I stared at the minister, and he 
stared at me. In this rather ludicrous position 
we sat for a short time; and finding that he did 
not, as I expected, break the silence, I ventured 
to ask him, whether he could believe that such 
translations correctly answered to the words of in- 
spired wisdom, and whether they did not turn the 
solemn and sublime instructions of Scripture into 
sheer nonsense, or the grossest absurdity. To 
this he would not assent: when I begged him to 
explain to me the meaning of such expressions as 
“dipped with the Holy Ghost;” “dipped with 
fire ;”” “‘dipped into one spirit ;” “ dipped into 
death ;” “ dipped into Christ ;” and “ preaching 
a dipping of repentance.” My request, however, 
was made in vain. The worthy pastor was evi- 
dently puzzled, though he would not confess it ; 
and shortly afterwards he pleaded want of time, 
and took his departure, much preferring, as it ap- 
peared to me, the passage from the house into the 


DOUBTS AND DIFFICULTIES. 31 


street, to any one of those which I had pointed 
out to him. . 

Mr. B., at the time of his visit, was evidently 
anxious that I should form one of a company of 
candidates for church fellowship, who were to be 
immersed about three weeks afterwards. He had 
also ventured prematurely to express his belief to 
several persons that I should be of the number. 
When, therefore, the reason of my hesitation 
transpired, it created much surprise and specula- 
tion. Many minds and many mouths were filled 
with sundry surmisings as to the real cause of this 
delay, few of which were charitable or correct. 
But another circumstance, which occurred at the 
same time, produced a still greater stir. Amongst 
the attendants at our chapel, there were two very 
intelligent and devout young ladies, who had three 
years before left the Established Church, in which 
they were brought up, because they could not 
profit by the preaching which they heard there. 
As their hearts and their income were large, and 
their habits inexpensive, their liberality was felt 
by a great number of the poor, and at public col- 
lections their contribution generally exceeded that 
of others. But their health was extremely deli- 
cate ; and by most they were considered as des- 
tined to an early grave. Qne of them suffered 


32 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


from an affection of the spine, and serious appre- 
hensions were entertained that consumption had 
commenced its fatal course in the other. By the 
perusal of books in favour of immersion, with 
which they had been copiously supplied, together 
with the earnest persuasives of Mr. B., the sisters 
were brought to believe that it became them in 
this way to profess the gospel. As their diffidence, 
however, amounted almost to a disease, and they 
secluded themselves much from society, they suf- 
fered a long and severe mental conflict, before 
they could so far control their feelings as to sub- 
mit to a ceremonial, which would expose them to 
what they deemed a most distressing publicity. 
But they were still more powerfully influenced by 
a fear, that the service in their case might prove 
as perilous as it was painful. Yet strong as these 
objections seemed, they had at length been si- 
lenced, partly by the confident manner in which 
they were assured by our minister that God would 
preserve them from all evil in the observance of his 
own ordinance, but principally by the conviction 
that this was a part of the cross which the 
Christian was commanded to carry. Although, 
therefore, their repugnance and apprehensions re- 
mained, a sense of duty preponderated. 

But their feelings were spared, and their con- 


DOUBTS AND DIFFICULTIES. 33 


sciences satisfied, by a striking, though, I believe, 
by no means a singular occurrence. About a 
month prior to their decision, a baptismal service 
had been performed at a small town a few miles 
from us; and amongst the immersed there was a 
young woman, at the time in apparently sound 
health, who caught a severe cold in the service, 
which speedily ran on to fever, delirium, and 
death. The cause was so evident, and the whole 
case so clear, that even the most contracted Bap- 
tists in our congregation (and there were those 
who seemed to think that God would actually 
work a miracle to counteract what, in some con- 
stitutions, would be the certain consequence of 
immersion,) were confounded ; whilst others con- 
fessed that “‘ it was a most mysterious providence.” 
This circumstance came to the ears of the two 
sisters, and it affected them deeply. ‘Their first. 
step was to send for Mr. B.; butas he still assured 
them of their safety, without assigning, as they 
thought, any reason for such assurance, or produc- 
ing a divine warrant to that effect, they were not 
satisfied ; and therefore they wisely resolved to do 
what they now perceived ought to have been done 
before, viz., to consult their medical attendant on 
the subject. His judgment was very strong. He 
said it would be perilous in the extreme, and that 


84 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


he knew scarcely any cause more calculated te 
quicken incipient disease and accelerate death. 
his decided them. Convinced that He who de- 
sireth mercy and not sacrifice, could not require 
them in such a way to hazard their lives, they 
wisely declined the service. As their case had 
created considerable interest, and their expected 
accession to the church was deemed of much im- 
portance, their withdrawment caused more com- 
motion than even my delay. 

What might have been the effect of this occur- 
rence upon others I cannot state ; but it suggested 
to my own mind a train of reflections which 
strengthened my previous suspicion, that immer- 
sion could not be the only proper mode of baptism. 
As far as I can now recall them, my thoughts ran 
in some such train as this. Christianity is a uni- 
versal system. It is designed for the world. One 
of its distinguishing features, which is also one of 
the clearest evidences of its divine origin, is the 
exact and entire adaptation of its regulations and 
requirements to every community, class, and crea- 
ture under heaven. ‘To say the least, each of its 
doctrines, and promises, and injunctions, and insti- 
tutions, is perfectly fitted to men of every clime, 
character, and condition. Whether they dwell in 
Iceland or Ethiopia, in the city or the wilderness, 


DOUBTS AND DIFFICULTIES. 35 


amidst the sands of the desert or the springs of 
the valley, it ordains no service, and requires no 
observance, which may not be readily performed. 
It is not a religion of sacred places, set seasons, 
and costly sacrifices. Its ritual is simple, not 
severe—suited not to the healthy and robust alone, 
but also to the delicate woman and the man of 
gray hairs. And this interesting peculiarity of 
the whole scheme evidently belonged to the bap- 
tismal rite as practised in the primitive age. It 
could be administered in any place, or at any time. 
Wherever the apostles preached, there and then 
they could baptize. In the city or the desert, the 
house or the prison, it was equally and always 
easy. There was no difficulty, no delay, no ex- 
emption. Age caused no hesitation; health con- 
stituted no barrier. Friends were not alarmed ; 
physicians were not consulted. The gloom of mid- 
night was as favourable for its performance as the 
brightness of noon. Families could observe the 
rite on the very first hour of their hearing the 
gospel; and thousands, apparently without diffi- 
culty, on the very day, and probably in the very 
place of their conviction. All this appeared to 
me to agree well with the general adaptation of 
Christianity to man’s changing circumstances, and 
with the opinion that baptism was administered 


36 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


by the simple and easy method of sprinkling ; but 
how to harmonize the views of Immersionists with 
either the genius of the gospel, or the practice 
of the primitive age, I could not discover. 

I was also impressed with the contrast between 
this painful and most repulsive mode of baptizing, 
and the gentle and generous spirit which pervades 
and adorns the other requirements of Christianity. 
All these furnish a large and admirable commen- 
tary upon the declaration, “ As a father pitieth 
his children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear 
him : for he knoweth our frame; he remembereth 
that we are dust.” In this respect, its services 
are invested with a character essentially different 
from the rigid rites of Judaism. It insists upon 
no specific ritual. It prescribes no precise points 
or punctilios, the non-observance of which would 
vitiate our obedience to its general requirements. 
No pattern of the spiritual structure, such as 
Moses saw on Mount Sinai, was shown to Peter, 
or Paul, or John. No pains nor penalties are 
threatened for slight violations of the letter or 
rubric of a ceremonial institute. Much is left 
open. A large measure of liberty is conceded to 
the Christian. A generous confidence is reposed 
in the church. For public worship no precise 
form has been prescribed, so assured was the di- 


DOUBTS AND DIFFICULTIES. 37 


vine Author of the gospel that he might safely 
leave such details to the enlightened and devout 
affections of his disciples. And even the solemn 
rite which was designed to “show the Lord’s 
death till he come” is described in very general 
terms; and instead of being enjoined upon the 
conscience by authority and threatening, it is com- 
mended to the heart by the gentle and tender 
appeal, ‘ This do in remembrance of me.” And 
the other ordinance, baptism, could in my view be 
no exception to this rule. Indeed, I thought I 
perceived this, not merely in the perfect ease with 
which it was administered and received in apos- 
tolic times, but in the very indefiniteness of the 
original terms, and even in the disputes which 
have hence arisen amongst those who would be 
“wise above what is written,’””—“ servants,” who 
certainly in this point are not “above their Lord.” 

I was much impressed with the conviction that, 
had immersion been essential, the law of baptism 
would have been promulgated in language widely 
different from what it is. We should then have 
had very minute directions, in words of no mere 
general, and certainly of no doubtful import. But 
this would have been as alien from the spirit of 
Christianity as it would be accordant with the 
principles of the Baptists. 

4 


38 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


For some time, these and similar reasonings 
suggested themselves to my thoughts; and firmly 
believing in the suitableness of every Christian 
ordinance to the case of all nations, I one day re- 
solved to consider whether this could be affirmed 
of immersion. I therefore took a map of the 
world, and viewed the subject in relation to some 
of its most important divisions. 

One thing, at the outset of this inquiry, oc- 
curred to me, that whether immersion might or 
might not be adapted to the climate of the differ- 
ent regions of the earth, it certainly does not suit 
the customs of many of their inhabitants; nor 
could it be generally practised, unless their social 
habits were completely changed. This is parti- 
cularly the case with Eastern nations, by whom 
nothing would be deemed more indecent, or felt to 
be more revolting, than the public exposure of 
their wives and daughters, and their immersion by 
aman. And this very feeling, be it remembered, 
has been inherited from their ancestors, and ex- 
isted in all its force when the apostles baptized in 
the very countries where it is still found. Strange, 
then, that a rite so offensive should haye been 
practised with such ease ; and stranger still, that 
it should ever have been enjoined. 

But the difficulty arising from climate seemed 


DOUBTS AND DIFFICULTIES. 39 


to me more formidable than that produced by 
custom. Even in our own country, and other 
temperate regions upon which my eye rested as I 
looked over the map, I well knew that immersion 

* was far from being so suitable and safe as might 
have been expected in any institution which the 
wise and gracious Saviour appointed to be univer- 
sally observed. On the contrary, I was con- 
vinced that it was generally inconvenient, and 
frequently dangerous. I knew, from medical 
testimony, as well as my own reasoning, that in 
many cases where only a predisposition existed to 
cerebral or inflammatory affections, to congestion, 
to consumption, and to numerous other maladies, 
death could only be averted by miracle; and that 
to submit to such a service, where serious 
diseases had begun to develope themselves, would 
be madness, if not murder. Such would often 
be the consequence even during the months of 
summer, and much more amid the snows of 
winter. 

I was well aware that in warmer regions, like 
Judea, the pain and peril which attend immer- 
sion under the clouds and cold of higher lati- 
tudes would be diminished. But in these coun- 
tries, where the heat is frequently mtense, and 
the drought all but universal, the scarcity and 


40 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


value of the element, so much of which is requi- 
site for immersing a multitude, presented a diffi- 
culty of another kind, hardly less formidable. 
Even in our own country, I knew what special 
provision, and sometimes protracted preparation, 
were requisite prior to such a service; and 
aware, from the statements of Oriental travellers, 
that few wants were more commonly or keenly 
felt by the inhabitants of the East than that of 
water, and that a quantity sufficient for immersion 
could in few situations be obtained without con- 
siderable cost and labour, I concluded that no 
appointment could well have been more unsuited 
to their circumstances. This I was assured, both 
from scriptural statements and from modern 
tourists, must have been the case in Judea, where 
the Jordan was the only river, and where, 
throughout a considerable portion of the year, 
the few narrow channels, occasionally filled with 
mountain torrents, or fed from intermitting 
springs, are entirely dry. I knew, moreover, that 
a solitary well supplied the city of Samaria; and 
that the springing up of a small fountain was the 
strong and frequently the sole reason for the en-- 
campment of armies, or the erection of towns. 
There were, indeed, baths in the dwellings of the 
opulent; but to suppose that the fishermen of 


DOUBTS AND DIFFICULTIES. 41 


Galilee could command such expensive luxuries, 
or conduct their numerous converts from amongst 
the poor into the abodes of the wealthy and 
noble, for the purpose of turning their baths into 
baptisteries, is one of those incredible and mon- 
strously absurd imaginations to which none 
would resort, but those who were driven by truth 
and reason from the fair field of fact and argu- 
ment. Such reflections confirmed my previous 
conviction, that dipping does not accord with a 
religion designed to be universal, and cannot be 
the baptism which Jesus Christ instituted for 
“all nations.” 

Even to entertain the question, whether immer- 
sion was adapted to Greenland, Iceland, Siberia, 
and similar lands, where, during much of the 
year, water is obtainable in small quantities, and 
merely for common use, only by dissolving ice or 
snow, seemed most absurd. I was convinced that 
it could not be a question, and that of all possible 
modes this would be the most difficult and unsuit- 
able. The suggestion pressed itself upon my 
mind that, instead of possessing the fitness which 
characterizes and commends all God’s arrange- 
ments, and forms so marked a feature of the gos- 
pel, had the great Author of this institution 
designed to encumber it, and render its observance 

4% 


42 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


inconvenient, painful, perilous, and, in many 
situations, impracticable, dipping was the very 
mode which he would have enjoined. 

These, and other topics connected with baptism, 
engaged much of my attention at this time; for I 
not only felt the necessity of thoroughly exa- 
mining the subject, but found myself placed by 
the importunities and displeasure of several Bap- 
tist friends on the defensive, and therefore com- 
pelled to give a reason for the hesitation I had 
discovered. I was also plentifully supplied with 
books and tracts in favour of immersion, which, in 
courtesy no less than from inclination, I care- 
fully perused. Their only result, however, was 
to suggest new objections to the mode, and to 
establish me in the belief that the common argu- 
ments in its favour were the weakest sophisms, 
and that there was not a text of Scripture which 
rendered it the least support. 


PART II. 
REMINISCENCES AND REFLECTIONS. 


ALTHOUGH, in consequence of the withdraw- 
ment of myself, and of the young ladies referred 
to ina preceding page, the number of candidates 
had been reduced, the public baptism of the re- 
mainder was not deferred. On that occasion I 
of course, occupied my accustomed place in our 
chapel; but frequently as I had attended similar 
services, I had never witnessed one with similar 
feelings. My recent reflections, and my peculiar 
circumstances, had invested the performance, and 
everything relating to it, with unusual interest. 
When I had been a spectator of such proceedings 
before, I had surveyed them with a somewhat 
easy and passive acquiescence. Taught from my 
childhood to regard the performance as scriptural, 
I had never dared to criticise its character, or to 
question its propriety. And yet some vivid and 
enduring impressions had been left upon my mind 
by these services, which certainly were not much 


(43) 


44 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


calculated to foster those serious feelings with 
which everything sacred should be regarded. 
During my childhood and youth, public immer- 
sions were simply, but very specially, amusing to 
me. Most vividly do the feelings still recur, 
(and had I been a Baptist, I am sure they would 
have blended painfully with better thoughts,) 
which arose high in my little heart, when my 
father lifted me up in his arms, or stood me upon 
the seat, to see the people go down into the bap- 
tistery, and to watch Mr. B. (which I did “ with 
all my eyes’) as he took hold of them one after 
another, and “pushed them,” as I was then ac- 
customed to describe it, “right under the water.” 
But although the entire spectacle was interesting, 
on one or two of these occasions there were some 
circumstances which specially impressed me, and 
somewhat heightened the sort of holiday feeling 
with which I enjoyed them. One of these was 
the shrill scream of a woman, as she felt herself 
going under the water. Another was the strug- 
gling of a young person, who succeeded in wrench- 
ing herself from the minister’s grasp, and fell 
with a loud splash into the baptistery. More 
than once, I recollected that persons fainted in 
the water; and I distinctly retain the image of 
the ghastly and death-like countenance of a wo- 


REMINISCENCES AND REFLECTIONS. 45 


man, as her head hung back, wet.and motionless, 
over the arm of the person who dragged her into 
the vestry. At another time, in an oblivious 
moment, I actually burst out into a loud laugh, 
and clapped my little hands with unutterable de- 
light, (for which, however, I was instantly deposed 
from my elevated standing-place, and sent to bed 
as soon as I reached home,) to see Mr. B., who, 
as I have said, was a short, stiff, portly person, 
lose his balance and, his footing, while attempting 
to immerse a man twice his own bulk, and him- 
self fall sideways, and with no small stir and 
splutter, into the water 

But these juvenile reminiscences, and the 
apathy which had succeeded them as I grew 
older, were now supplanted by a disposition to 
survey the scene as an unbiassed spectator, and 
to ascertain, if possible, the impression which it 
was calculated to make upon pious strangers, or 
the unconverted world. 

There was another cause which gaye a pecu- 
liarity to my state of mind on this occasion. I 
knew that, in consequence of the circumstances 
narrated, the service was. deemed extraordinary, 
and that during it many thoughts would be turned 
towards me, and strong desires cherished that by 


46 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


the discourse which was then to be delivered, I 
might be either confounded or convinced. 

It is the common custom for two ministers to 
be engaged at these services; one to preach, and 
the other to baptize. This arrangement is in- 
tended, I believe, to preserve the preacher, after 
he has heated himself by his advocacy of much 
water, (and on few occasions does his blood rise 
so near to the boiling point,) from the extreme 
danger of immediately descending from the pulpit 
to the pool. And no one can question the pru- 
dence of this division of labour, especially for the 
sake of such short-necked, apoplectie subjects as 
Mr. B. But, however discreet, it is difficult to © 
reconcile its necessity, either with the wisdom of 
Him who commanded his disciples to “teach all 
nations, baptizing them ;’’ or with the fact, that 
neither John at the Jordan, nor the apostles on 
the day of Pentecost, who both preached and bap- 
tized during one service, and who did not possess 
the modern and luxurious preservatives of Mack- 
intosh overalls and mud boots, needed any such 
security against disease,—a circumstance which 
makes one shrewdly suspect that their mode 
of baptism and that of the Immersionists do not 


agree. 


“REMINISCENCES AND REFLECTIONS. AT 


The minister who had been engaged to occupy 
the pulpit on this occasion was extremely popular 
in his own denomination, and was deemed the 
most powerful advocate of their peculiarities in 
that part of the country. He was well known in 
our town, and much admired by our congregation. 
Whenever he visited us, our chapel was crowded ; 
and in general his sermons were powerfully im- 
pressive. But I was not singular in the opinion 
that he had been solicited to take a part in this 
service, not so much on account of his general 
solemnity, as of his controversial skill. And it 
was very currently reported that he was called in 
specially to demolish the objections which I was 
known to entertain to immersion ; and by some it 
was most confidently predicted that I should be 
made ashamed of them, and of myself. 

These rumours had reached my ear, but they 
did not disturb me. I was thoroughly open to 
conviction, and fully prepared to retrace my steps, 
and submit to immersion, whenever scriptural 
reasons for it were advanced. Nor, although I 
considered the references too pointed, and not in 
good taste, did I fail to join in the petition, which 
was more than once repeated during the prayer 
before the sermon, that what was about to be ad- 
vanced from the pulpit might “ convince the gain- 


48 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


sayers, confirm the wavering, and remove all pre- 
judice against the ordinances of the Lord!” I 
could also adopt the supplications then presented, 
though I could not sympathize with what I feared 
to be the spirit and design by which they were 
dictated, “that the enemies of the truth might 
not be permitted to scatter tares amongst the 
wheat, that objectors might renounce their carnal 
reasonings, and that timid disciples might no 
longer consult flesh and blood by following the 
Lord afar off.” 

I thought, moreover, that the hymn which was 
sung after the prayer had been selected with a 
similar reference to local circumstances. It was 
the 447th of Dr. Rippon’s selection,—a part of 
which contains a very strange accommodation to 
adult immersion of the words “ Hinder me not;” 
which were addressed by Abraham’s servant to 
the relatives of Rebecca, when they said to him, 
‘ Let the damsel abide with us a few days.” One 
verse especially seemed to me a most unwarrant- 
able misappropriation of a solemn sentiment, and 
of the Saviour’s example, to a doubtful and dis- 
puted form,— 

“Through floods and flames, if Jesus lead, 
Pll follow where he goes: 

‘Hinder me not,’ shall be my ery, 
Though earth and hell oppose.” 


REMINISCENCES AND REFLECTIONS. 49 


Probably I might not have noticed this verse 
so much, had it not been read in an unusually 
high pitch of voice, and attracted towards my- 
self the furtive glances of several, who evi- 
dently thought that I ought to be confounded by 
it. 

When the preacher, arose all eyes were fastened 
upon him, and a remarkable stillness was main- 
tained while he announced his text. It was from 
Ephesians, iv. 5,—“ One baptism.” And I well 
remember that, as he read it the first time, he 
gave a very singular and significant emphasis to 
the word ‘‘one,” and accompanied the utterance 
with an expressive glance of his eyes, and a pecu- 
liar shake of the head, which were evidently in- | 
tended to convey to us the preacher’s full belief 
that this passage settled the whole controversy. 
This kind of oratory was varied when he repeated 
the text. He then paused after the word “one” 
for several seconds; and during this hiatus turned 
himself to each gallery, and looked down upon the 
area of the place, bestowing, as I thought, more 
attention to our pew than it deserved, as if to 
defy all gainsayers; and concluded by bringing 
out with full force the word “baptism.” I never 
read the passage, and never shall, without the re- 
currence of that scene, and the recollection of 


5 


50 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


Mr. R.’s long-drawn utterance of “ one——bap- 
tism.” 

Having up to this period of my life attached 
but one meaning to the word “baptism,” in 
nearly all the passages of Scripture which contain 
it, it did not then occur to me that in this place 
it referred to a unity of spirit, not of form, and 
that the entire fabric of the preacher’s argumen- 
tation rested upon a misinterpretation of his text. 
But although at the time, partly from my own 
inconsideration, and partly from the caution with 
which the preacher avoided all allusion to a di- 
versity of sentiment on the point, I yielded my 
mind to his assumption, I have seen since then 
that it was without the shadow of a proof. 
Standing as these words do in the very centre 
of a paragraph which describes the essentials of 
Christian unity, and surrounded by numerous 
references, all of which are purely spiritual, it 
would be exceedingly strange if they designated 
nothing beyond a rite; and still more so, if they 
are to be limited, as the preacher’s reasoning 
assumed, to the mere mode in which such a rite 
should be administered. Repeatedly in his ser- 
mon did he take the liberty of reciting the pas- 
sage as if it had been written ‘one immersion ;” 
which, though not without precedent in his own 


REMINISCENCES AND REFLECTIONS. 51 


denomination, was a most disingenuous and un- 
warrantable artifice, in a discourse designed pro- 
fessedly to prove the very point which was thus 
taken for granted. I am not sure, however, 
whether the preacher by so doing did not un- 
Wittingly expose the inconsistency of his own 
version. At least I believe that this would 
have been its effect, had he not confined the 
quotation to the single clause thus torn from its 
context, and had honestly read the entire pas- 
sage thus,—“ There is one body, and one Spirit, 
even as ye are called in one hope of your 
calling. One Lord, one faith, one dipping. One 
God and Father of all, who is above all, and 
through all, and in you all.” A more incon- 
gruous juxtaposition it is scarcely possible to 
conceive. Neither logic nor learning can be 
necessary to make this apparent. “The plain 
reader” (so often appealed to and imposed upon 
by Baptists) may in such a case be confidently 
constituted a judge. Piety, no less than rea- 
son, revolts from a rendering of a passage by 
which the unity of its parts is so strangely 
violated, and an importance attached to the 
mode of administering an outward ordinance, 
which agrees no better with its design than it 
does with the essential verities named in the 


52 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


same sentence, and with the spiritual dispensa- 
tion whose vital truths are set forth therein. On 
the other hand, no conjunction of parts could 
have been more harmonious or beautiful, if the 
“one baptism” spoken of be not an outward ser- 
vice, but an inward sanctification,—that baptism* 
of the Spirit which “saves us,” and which the 
apostle Peter affirms to be “not the putting 
away of the filth of the flesh,” a mere ceremonial 
cleansing, “‘ but the answer of a good conscience 
towards God.” 

Before proceeding with my narrative, I may be 
permitted to make the remark, that neither on 
this nor on any other public occasion do I remem- 
ber to have heard the words “dip,” and “ dip- 
ping,” and “dippers” applied to Baptists and 
their mode of baptizing. They affirm, and that 
most truly, that the Scripture terms are not trans- 
lated from the Greek, but simply transferred ; and 
to such a mere transference they are so strongly 
opposed, that solely because the Committee of the 
Bible Society will not appropriate the sacred 
money entrusted to their hands for the printing 
of versions of the Scriptures, in which the ori- 
ginal is so rendered as to sanction their mode of 
baptizing, they have formed for this purpose a 
separate institution. But why do they not con- 


REMINISCENCES AND REFLECTIONS. 53 


stantly abide by this principle, and consistently 
substitute for ‘‘ baptize” and “ Baptist” the words 
“dip” and “dipper ?”? Why do they not preach, 
and write, and change the phraseology of the 
English Bible, in accordance with the reasons of 
their withdrawment from the Bible Society? Why 
should the transferred expressions be excluded 
from the language of the Hindu, and retained in 
that of the Briton? Why should they shrink 
from the honest course of renouncing all ambi- 
guous terms? Were they thus to act, they would 
never more speak of “ baptisms,” but of “ dip- 
pings ;” nor would they call themselves Baptists, 
but Dippers. No longer should we hear of Baptist 
Chapels, Baptist Unions, Baptist Anniversaries, 
Baptist Publications, Baptist Magazines, Baptist 
Children’s Magazines, and Baptist Missions; but, 
in their stead, we should have the true English 
and far more accurate phrases of Dipping Chapels, 
Dipping Unions, Dipping Anniversaries, Dipping 
Publications, Dipping Magazines, Dipping Child- 
ren’s Magazines, and Dipping Missions. 

And why should they not thus correct their 
customary phraseology? If, as Dr. Carson oracu- 
larly affirms, and as many have maintained before 
him, the original word baptizo means to dip, and 
nothing else, what objection can those who adopt 

5x 


54 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


this opinion fairly urge against the change? I 
know of none except this—that it would demon- 
strate the folly of their positive assertions, and 
expose themselves to the loud laugh of impartial 
men. And of this their avoidance of the only 
words which accurately describe their practice is a 
sufficient evidence. They know well that an 
“improved version” of the New Testament could 
not be made rigidly on their principles, without 
rendering many portions of it unintelligible or 
absurd. 

But it may be said that if the words “dip” 
and “dipping” be generally eschewed, Baptist 
preachers and writers frequently employ the terms 
“immerse” and “immersion,” and that this is 
all the same thing. Iam aware that such a prac- 
tice is common ; and I know, moreover, that these 
expressions are often so introduced as to lead the 
unthinking to conclude that they answer both to 
the original of the New Testament and to the 
mode adopted by the Baptists! I do not assert, 
indeed, for I do not believe, that this is done with 
a design to mislead; but that such is the effect of 
using the word “immersion,” I am quite sure. 
Is it right, therefore, to inquire whether its signi- 
fication is “all the same” as that of dipping? 
Every one knows that to “ dip” is to plunge any- 


REMINISCENCES AND REFLECTIONS. 55 


thing under water, and almost immediately after- 
wards to take it out again,—that it includes a 
double action, and therefore describes most accur- 
ately the mode chosen by Baptists. But it is 
otherwise with the verb “to immerse.” This 
term is compounded of two Latin words, which 
severally mean “in” and “ plunge ;” the former 
being prefixed to the latter to strengthen the idea 
which it conveys. And, according to Dr. Johnson, 
it simply means “to put under the water; to 
cover deep.” Unlike “dip,” it does not include 
nor imply the additional act of drawing out of the 
water that which has just before been put under 
it; but its signification is restricted to the single 
operation of covering, or “sinking deep.” It 
would be applicable to the mode which the Bap- 
tists adopt, 7f they simply put their proselytes 
beneath the water, and left them there; if they 
merely “buried them in baptism,” but then aban- 
doned them “to rise again” as best they could. 
The word, therefore, is inaccurately applied to 
their performance : it only describes half of it; 
and it usurps the place of a plainer term, which 
includes the whole, and which is, of all expres- 
sions, the most suitable and exact which the Eng- 
lish tongue supplies. This word “ immersion,” 
moreover, is as much transferred from the Latin 


56 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


as “baptism” is from the Greek ; but it is recom- 
mended by a sort of cloudiness—a convenient am- 
biguity, which mystifies the uneducated mind, and 
hides the absurdity of translations and actions, 
which would be instantly seen were the plain word 
“ dipping” put in its place. 

But I must return to the sermon. After a 
short introduction, in which the preacher desig- 
nated his own denomination “ the despised Bap- 
tists,” and expressed his perfect willingness to 
bear the reproach of men, in humble words in- 
deed, but with ill-disguised bitterness of spirit 
and contempt of those who thus regarded them, 
he proposed,—I. To offer some observations on 
the positive institutions of the gospel; II. To 
establish the claim of believers’ immersion to that 
character; and, III. To meet the objections of 
those who shrunk from its observance. Having, 
under the first division of his discourse, pointed 
out the distinction between moral laws and posi- 
tive institutions, and made some general remarks 
upon the importance of the latter, Mr. R. pro- 
ceeded to prove their permanent obligation, and 
the consequent duty of every believer to observe 
them. In all this there was nothing to which I 
could object, and little which any Christians (with 
the exception of the. Quakers) would have ques- 


REMINISCENCES AND REFLECTIONS. 57 


tioned. But yet the antagonistic manner and ar- 
gumentative tone of the preacher were peculiarly 
fitted to make a different impression, and to lead 
the ignorant to suppose that other denominations 
held and acted upon very different principles. 
This, indeed, he did not assert, and, I believe, did 
not design ; but had he done both, he would not, 
Iam persuaded, have succeeded much better in 
convincing his hearers that on these points, ‘“ they 
were the people, and that wisdom would die with 
them.” Throughout, he delivered his sentiments 
as one having authority to speak on these subjects, 
and more than once he referred to the Immer- 
sionists, in a style singularly suited to convey the 
idea that they, if not the very pillar and ground 
of the truth, were certainly “set,” in a very pe- 
culiar and public manner, “for the defence and 
confirmation of the gospel.” 

When the preacher announced the second head 
of his sermon, the manner in which he drew up 
his stately person, and compressed his eye-brows 
and lips, made it evident to me that he thought 
himself well prepared to advance something very 
convincing, and that he wished his audience to 
understand that he was about to scatter all his 
adversaries, and conduct his argument to a trium- 
phant conclusion. And this feeling was evidently 


58 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


contagious. Upon the announcement being made 
by Mr. R. that he would prove believers’ immer- 
sion to be a positive institution of the gospel, 
there was a simultaneous and sympathetic stir 
throughout the chapel, and a confused noise cre- 
ated by various efforts to prepare for what was 
coming—some comfortably adjusting their persons 
on the seats; others shuffling the stools and has- 
socks, to secure an easy posture for their extremi- 
ties; and not a few coughing when they did not 
need it, to prevent the interruption and save the 
trouble when they did. But the moment the 
preacher opened his lips, the sound of his voice 
stilled the temporary tumult, and hushed the au- 
dience into breathless silence. Nor was I the 
least attentive of his hearers. Not, indeed, that I 
expected any thing properly original; for I had so 
frequently heard and read what is usually ad- 
vanced in favour of immersion, as to be perfectly 
familiar with, and heartily weary of, the flimsy 
fallacies, the spider’s web, by which the unin- 
structed and undiscerning are entangled and se- 
cured. Yet I did anticipate, from the reputation 
of the preacher as a polemic, and the confident 
tone in which he announced his design, that old 
reasonings on the subject would be reproduced 
with new force, or in new forms. But in this I 


REMINISCENCES AND REFLECTIONS. 59 


was doomed to disappointment. Nothing could 
have been more trite than the bold assertions, and 
nothing more customary than the convenient omis- 
sions, of his discourse. 

He commenced by saying that the proposition 
he was about to prove would be considered under 
two heads: in the first place, he would show that 
none but believers were the proper subjects of bap- 
tism; and, secondly, that all who sustained such a 
character should be immersed. 

The remarks in support of the first point were 
brief and declamatory. They consisted mainly in 
strong denunciations of infant sprinkling, and in 
fervid, if they were not feigned, exclamations of 
astonishment that any Christian could differ on 
this subject from himself. As my attention, 
hitherto, had been almost exclusively restricted 
to the mode of baptism, and the question, Who 
are its proper subjects? had but very casually 
occupied my thoughts, I was not then prepared 
to controvert the preacher’s conclusion, although 
there was nothing advanced by him which ap- 
peared to me to have much weight, and some 
statements I could have easily disproved. In 
truth, there was only one topic upon which he 
dilated at any length,—the incapacity of infants 
to understand the ordinance, and the absurdity of 


60 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


administering it to them. But upon this point 
he declaimed with much strength of voice and 
energy of manner. Again and again he affirmed 
that no single child had ever been the better for 
baptism, challenged all the Pzedo-baptists in the 
world to deny his assertion, and, with most con- 
temptuous tones, denounced the practice and its 
abettors. All this jarred harshly upon my feel- 
ings; and instead of producing conviction, it only 
excited disgust. It was an appeal, not to reason, 
but to passion; and its tendency was not to re- 
move the doubts of the ingenuous inquirer, but to 
confirm the prejudices of the narrow-minded par- 
tisan. And I thought I could discern, during 
the delivery of some of his strongest denuncia- 
tions, decisive evidence of this in the demeanour of 
several around me. Some of those who had risen 
from their seats stood gazing intently upon the 
preacher, and might be seen, at the conclusion of 
each ejaculation and appeal, giving their heads 
an emphatic jerk of approbation. Over the fea- 
tures of others there played a grim smile of satis- 
faction, which in a few cases became ghastly, 
from the unnatural contrast which an effort to 
seem pleased presented with their crimped-up 
eheeks, corrugated upper lip,- and cadayerous 
countenance: whilst there were a few from whose 


* 


REMINISCENCES AND REFLECTIONS, 61 


eyes there flashed the gleams of an unhallowed 
fire, which the preacher’s words had kindled in 
their hearts. 

These various signs of emotion strongly at- 
tracted my attention; and as I then took a con- 
siderable interest in the congregation, and was 
zealous for their reputation, I rejoiced to think 
that but few of our Independent friends were pre- 
sent to hear and see such a display of uncharita- 
bleness. 

Much, however, as these objects occupied my 
thoughts, I was not so engrossed as to allow what 
might be termed the argument of this part of the 
discourse to pass unnoticed. Although I had had 
few opportunities of observing the influence of 
infant baptism, I had both heard and read 
enough to convince me that the preacher’s dog- 
matic denunciations of its inutility would be 
firmly denied by his brethren, and that his de- 
mand of proof would be readily responded to. I 
perceived, moreover, that such an objection in- 
volved a gross fallacy; for it assumed that no 
advantage whatever could accrue from the ordi- 
nance, unless at the time of its administration 
the infant understood its design: whereas it must 
be obvious at a glance, that if the parents rightly 
discern the truth taught in relation to their child, 

6 


62 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


and feel the obligations which they solemnly 
acknowledge when they thus dedicate it to the 
Lord, the subsequent influence, both upon them- 
selves and upon their youthful charge, must be in 
the highest degree important. 

This, however, was only a passing idea; but in 
subsequent reflections upon this sermon, I was 
strongly impressed with the conviction that the 
preacher’s statements not only involved an empty 
fallacy, but a heavy imputation upon the God of 
Abraham and the Saviour of mankind. I saw 
that the condemnation pronounced upon the bap- 
tism of infants, solely because they could not com- 
prehend its design, would, if it were just, equally 
apply to the cirewmeision of infants by the father 
of,.the faithful, and the blessing of infants by 
Jesus Christ. More than once during his sermon 
Mr. R. exclaimed, “‘ How absurd to sprinkle an 
unconscious babe!” And since then I have asked 
myself why, for the selfsame reason, it might not 
also be said, ‘ How absurd to cirewmeise an un- 
conscious babe!” ‘How absurd to bless it!” 
Surely the Jewish children of eight days old, and 
the infants enfolded in the arms of Jesus, were as 
“unconscious” of the design of the service per- 
formed upon them as are those who are now bap- 
tized. But were such services “absurd?” They 


REMINISCENCES AND REFLECTIONS. 63 


must have been so upon Mr. R.’s rule of judg- 
ment. Such a fearful condemnation of an ordi- 
nance and an act, which all acknowledge to have 
been ‘divinely wise,’ was unquestionably in- 
volved in his reasoning; and I should have been 
the more impressed with the manifest inconsis- 
tency between this mode of deciding a contro- 
versy, and the loud professions of reverence for 
Scripture with which Mr. R.’s sermon abounded, 
had I not been shocked by its still grosser im- 
piety. 

But although the preacher’s declamation against 
infant baptism was brief, the young women who 
composed the bulk of his audience deemed it, I 
doubt not, quite decisive of the question, or, to 
quote the words of one of them, “ particularly 
good.” Mr. R.’s main purpose, however, was 
evidently to meet local circumstances, by proving 
that immersion alone is Christian baptism. To 
this, therefore, he devoted a considerable portion 
of his discourse. And whatever else might be 
defective in the maintenance of his point, there 
was no lack of zeal. Rarely has so cold a subject 
generated so much heat. The tongue, the fist, 
and the foot each performed its part. With sten- 
torian voice and emphatic stamp, and heavy blows 
upon the Bible, if not ‘with start and stare 


64 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


theatric,” he strove to make his words impressive. 
His entire manner reminded me of the practice of 
those savage tribes, who, when engaged in battle, 
endeavour, by violent gesticulations and horrid 
clamour, to paralyse or scatter the foes whom 
they cannot otherwise subdue. And, undoubtedly, 
if strong positions in reasoning, like fortified 
places, could be won by assault, or carried by 
storm, the preacher’s victory would have been 
most complete. 

The substance of Mr. R.’s reasoning on immer- 
sion will appear in the next part. I shall, there- 
fore, only add here, that as he advanced no argu- 
ment which I had not previously weighed, my 
views at the conclusion of his discourse continued 
much the same as they were at its commencement. 
But not so my feelings. These had been most 
painfully excited by what was advanced under the 
third head of the sermon, where the preacher pro- 
posed to remove the difficulties and reply to the 
objections of those who did not submit to immer- 
sion. Here I naturally expected something, at 
least, like a statement of the reasonings which re- 
strained the great majority of Christians from 
practising this mode of baptism. But I was once 
more subjected to disappointment. Moral diffi- 
culties, not mental, were the only ones which the 


REMINISCENCES AND REFLECTIONS. 65 


preacher deemed it just or wise to dispose of, or 
even to name. No person, had he been ignorant 
of the fact that there were in the world Christians 
as intelligent and upright as the Baptists, who, 
after most careful consideration, conscientiously 
differed from them, could have learned, or would 
have imagined it, from Mr. R.’s remarks. On the 
contrary, their tendency was to make this single 
impression, that whilst in theory others agreed 
with himself, in practice they conferred with flesh 
and blood. One class was described as shrinking 
from an admitted obligation, because it was a pain- 
ful cross; another, because they were too weak in 
faith to believe that God would preserve them in 
the observance of his own ordinance. Some were 
represented as standing aloof, on the ground that 
immersion was not essential to salvation; and not 
a few because they were too proud to join so small 
and despised a community as the Baptists. Many 
strong things were said upon this last point, and 
in such a tone as to satisfy me that the preacher 
had really much more exalted notions of his sect 
than he professed to have; but I cannot be sure 
that I correctly report this part of his sermon, for 
during its delivery my thoughts were diverted, and 
my seriousness disturbed, by an occurrence of the 
previous week, which it recalled to my mind. 


6* 


66 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. ~ 


Meeting one of our old church members—a weak 
but worthy individual—he thus accosted me :— 
“Well, young man, I am sorry to hear that you 
shrink from the water; but ah! I remember doing 
the same thing myself for a long time, and I 
thought that there was nothing at all in the Bible 
about dipping ; but I’ll tell you how I learned the 
truth. One day, when I was walking by a river, 
these words came to me, just as if any person was 
speaking into my ear,—<‘ Fear not, little flock, for 
it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the 
kingdom ;’ and I said to myself, ‘ Now this little 
flock must be the Baptists for in our town there 
was no flock so small as they were. I am sure 
then that they must be right, and I won’t resist 
the truth any longer. So I went to the Baptist 
minister, and asked him about it; and he said it 
was quite correct, and that I ought to go under the 
water.” 

The conclusion of the sermon contained an ear- 
nest appeal to waverers, and sundry reasons for 
laying aside every objection, and submitting to 
“the Lord’s appointment ;” and immediately after- 
wards seven persons were immersed—six young 
females and one man. Most of these I knew, and 
I had a favourable impression of their sincerity. 
Of one thing, indeed, I was sure—that prior to 


REMINISCENCES AND REFLECTIONS. 67 


their baptism, they had been subjected by our 
minister to several examinations as to their religi- 
ous opinions and history; that they had also been 
conversed with by two of the deacons; and, after 
all, they had been compelled to pass through the 
fiery ordeal of appearing personally before the 
church, and “ giving in their experience,” as it is 
termed—that is, standing up in the face of the 
people, and telling them what they had thought 
and felt on the subject of their soul’s salvation. 

Of the service itself I shall say but little. To 
some such an exhibition may seem decent, wise, 
significant, and even solemn; but with such im- 
pressions I have no sympathy. While I looked 
at the young women, standing on the margin of 
the pool, decked out in decorated caps, and white 
vestments, far more tastily arranged than simple 
convenience required, and marked the manner in 
which they were severally plunged by the minis- 
ter, and then, as my eye followed each of them, 
drenched and dripping (a spectacle anything but 
impressive), from the baptistery to the vestry, 
where I knew that the very necessary, but very 
unapostolical luxuries of brandy, fire, and changes 
of raiment awaited them, I said to myself, “Can 
this be Christianity ?” 

On leaving the chapel, instead of returning 


68 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


home, as I had been wont to do immediately after 
each service, I yielded to an irrepressible desire to 
seek shelter in some shady retreat, where, unob- 
served, I might review the scene I had just wit- 
nessed, and indulge the thoughts which confusedly 
crowded into my mind. Constrained by this feel- 
ing, and too much engrossed with my own reflec- 
tions to regard appearances, or care about the spe- 
culations and surmises which so unusual a course 
would call forth, I bent my steps towards the 
nearest egress from the town, and sauntered into a 
narrow and lovely lane, which terminated in an 
open glade, whither from my childhood I had 
loved to wander in search of the wood-flowers, 
which flourished there in great variety. It was 
about the middle of May: the noon was clear and 
bright, and the air fresh but balmy. I seated 
myself upon the trunk of a noble oak, which had 
just been felled ; and, although the scenery around 
me was simple and familiar, never before did I 
survey it with such pure enjoyment, or drink in 
with so keen a satisfaction the sweet influences of 
nature with which my senses and my spirit were 
regaled. Just escaped from the close and noxious 
atmosphere of a confined sectarianism, into an im- 
mediate contact with which my thoughts had been 
so painfully forced during the previous morning, 


REMINISCENCES AND REFLECTIONS. 69 


I experienced an elation and elasticity of soul not 
to be described, and rejoiced with more than or- 
dinary exultation in the liberty wherewith Christ 
had made me free. I felt that ih that place I 
could have fellowship with God. Here, around, 
above, beneath, I read his character, and could 
realize his presence. The pure, deep xther, the 
soft yet bracing air, the cloudless sun and cheer- 
ing light, the fresh fragrance of the hedge-rows, 
the sweet sound of blithe birds and murmuring 
breezes among the branches; indeed, the entire 
scene which surrounded me suggested no senti- 
ments but such as were hallowed and elevated, nor 
would it blend with any others. This conviction 
was forced upon me. Repeatedly did I recur to 
the service of the morning, and endeavour to fix 
my roving and reluctant thoughts upon some part 
of the discourse which I had been hearing ; but the 
effort proved vain. My mind was predisposed by 
the objects before me only for much higher exer- 
cises ; and I felt that to turn from them to the 
dissection of sophistries, and the discussion of 
topics so insignificant as those which had exer- 
cised the utmost vigour of the preacher’s mind, 
and the full compass of his voice, would be to 
descend from heaven to earth, and almost to dese- 
crate the glorious temple of the Creator, which 
his own hand had reared around me. 


70 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


This impression was deepened when I took out 
my pocket-bible, and read in succession the 40th 
chapter of Isaiah, the 17th chapter of John’s gos 
pel, and the 12th and following chapters of the 
Epistle to the Romans. Here I felt that I had 
communion with the God who had stretched out 
the heavens and formed the earth. The noble, 
generous, sublime sentiments of the sacred page 
bore the impress of the same mind, and presented 
many of the same features as the natural scenery 
of the spot in which I sat. Their separate in- 
fluences also perfectly harmonized. As the light 
and the air blended with each other, so did the 
teachings of the two books which I was then pe- 
tusing. But neither of them agreed with the 
theme to which my thoughts had been directed. 
Here was nothing narrow—nothing little. The 
sentiments were sublime; the range of vision 
ample; the spirit generous and divine. Between 
the erect form and noble aspect of religion as here 
presented, and that cramped, and crippled, and 
creeping thing, the unnatural and ungainly mo- 
tions of which I had that morning watched with 
shame and sorrow, I saw and felt that the differ- 
ence was immeasurable. Most deeply did I then 
realize the truth, that as “high as the heavens 
are above the earth, so high are God’s ways 


REMINISCENCES AND REFLECTIONS. 71 


above our ways, and his thoughts above our 
thoughts.” 

While I was musing thus, my attention was at- 
tracted towards a singular and stunted tree, which 
stood near the spot on which I was sitting. Its 
trunk was knotted and gnarled. Its branches 
were curiously twisted, and but scantily clothed 
with foliage; and in its general appearance it 
presented a very striking contrast to several noble 
elms and oaks which flourished around it. Cu- 
rious to ascertain the cause of this difference, I 
left my seat, and proceeded to the spot where this 
deformed tree was growing, when the explanation 
immediately presented itself. On the one side, 
near a hedge, within a few feet of which it stood, 
a deep ditch had been dug, which, some years be- 
fore, had severed some of its main roots, and cut 
off a large portion of its supplies; whilst on the 
other side there was a footpath, which had been 
much used when the tree was young, and had ma- 
terially impaired its vigour. Here, thought I, do 
I see a true emblem of the system from which I 
had been so strongly repelled. Though, like this 
tree, planted in a large place, and in a fruitful 
soil, and possessing those essential truths, and 
that vital spirit, which might have secured its 
generous growth, its range has been restricted, its 


72 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


roots impaired by man. The deep ditch of an ex- 
clusive creed, and the constant tramp of sectarian 
feet along its narrow pathway, have checked its 
growth, changed its form, covered what might 
have been a straight and sturdy trunk with un- 
sightly excrescences, and left upon its crooked 
boughs but a sickly and scanty foliage. 


PAR DT! Te 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES 


During the morning of the day after the ser- 
vice just described, I had occasion to be much in 
the town, and was not a little amused at the sig- 
nificant manner in which two or three attendants 
at our chapel, whom I happened to meet, eyed 
and addressed me. But my most formidable ren- 
counter of this kind occurred on my return home, 
where I found Mrs. B., our minister’s wife, with 
her two daughters. They had evidently called for 
the purpose of ascertaining the impression which 
had been made by Mr. R.’s sermon; and just as I 
opened the parlour door, I heard my mother, whose 
voice was usually mild and soft, exclaim with con- 
siderable animation, “No! Mrs. B., I am quite 
sure that George is sincere!” Her face was flushed 
as I entered the room, and all the ladies appeared 
rather confused ; but, although I divined the cause, 
I did my best to put them at their ease. After 
the usual preliminaries, and without the slightest 


% (73) 


74 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


reference to the subject, the worthy visitor sud- 
denly turned towards me, and said, “ Well, Mr 
George, and what did you think of the sermon 
yesterday morning? Your mind is settled now, I 
hope! Oh! dear, was it not convincing? What 
a wonderful man that Mr. R. is! Did you ever 
hear such arguments?” Unwilling to debate 
these points with the lady, of whose character I 
entertained a much higher estimate than of her 
judgment, and anxious not to disturb the compla- 
cent satisfaction which the preacher had afforded 
her, I endeavoured to evade the subject. But the 
attempt was vain. Determined to satisfy her cu- 
riosity, and attain the object of her call, she con- 
tinued to assail me with interrogatives, until, in 
order to prevent any misconstruction of my silence, 
I was compelled to confess that I could not quite 
agree with the estimate she had formed of Mr. R., 
or his oration. No sooner had the words passed 
my lips, than both mother and daughters burst 
forth into a simultaneous and confused clash of 
tongues; and, from amidst the mass of broken 
ejaculations which they heaped upon my unfortu- 
nate head, all that I could distinetly hear, and 
that only because they were often repeated, were 
the words,—‘‘ Dear! I am surprised!” “ Well! 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 75 


it i sad!” “Ah! Idid hope better things.” 
‘What will my poor husband say ?”” 

} As soon as the ladies had a little relieved them- 
selves in this way, the worthy matron turned again 
to me, and said, “‘ But, Mr. George, wasn’t the 
ELunuch baptized?” “Certainly, ma’am,” I re- 
plied. “But wasn’t he ¢mmersed, I mean?” “TI 
do not know that he was.” “ Dear me, Mr. George, 
why does n’t it say so?” “Not that I am aware 
of, ma’am.” “Well,” she added, with uplifted 
eyes and hands, “‘I am surprised. Why, doesn’t 
it say that he ‘ went down into the water, and came 
up out of the water? and is not that just the same 
as if it was said that he was immersed?” ‘Not 
exactly so, Mrs. B.; for you may remember it is 
stated that both Philip and the Hunuch went down 
into and came up out of the water,—and you do 
not, I presume, believe that Philip baptized him- 
self as well as the Ethiopian?” ‘‘ Why no, to be 
sure. Well, I declare, I never thought of that, 
now.” And then, recovering a little from her 
surprise, she added, “But, perhaps, he did after 
all: why not? It might have been so, you know; 
and as it says that they both went down into the 
water, it was so, of course.” ‘Well, Mrs. B.,” 
I observed, “you are the most consistent Baptist 
I ever met with, and you are even wiser than your 


76 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


husband; for though I have often heard him lay 
much stress upon the same words, to prove that 
one of the persons to whom they refer was im- 
mersed, he will not, as fairly as you have done, 
allow that this was also the case with the other.” 
“Thank you for your compliment, Mr. George,” 
rejoined the worthy wife; “but I dare say my 
husband is right, for he never goeg farther than 
the Bible.” “TI beg your pardon,” I added, “ but 
I am pretty sure that both he and other Baptists 
do so, whenever they use these words, which sim- 
ply mean that they went down from the chariot 
to some water by the wayside, and then went up 
again, as a proof that either of them was im- 
mersed. You know that yesterday Mr. R. came 
down from the pulpit, and stood at the edge of the 
baptistery, while Mr. B. was baptizing; but was he 
immersed? Yet he went down to the water just 
as much as Philip and the Hunuch. Perhaps,” I 
added, ‘‘ you may remember, when I called at your 
house last week, that you opened the door your- 
self, and apologized to me for doing so, by saying 
that your servant had just gone down to the brook 
at the bottom of your garden to fetch some water. 
Now, I am sure that you did not intend me to un- 
derstand from your words that Betsy had been bap- 
tized.” “Oh! Mr. George,” said the good lady, 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 77 


© now you are joking.” “ Not so, ma’am, I assure 
you; I merely mention these cases because the lan- 
guage applicable to them conveys exactly the same 
idea, and no other, as the words upon which Mr. R. 
dwelt so long, which you have just quoted as a 
clear proof of immersion, and which form the 
most efficacious means of making Baptist con- 
verts.” 

Just at this point of the conversation, the 
eldest daughter interposed the remark, that the 
words were not going down “to” and coming up 
“from,” but going down “into” and coming up 
“out of” the water. I allowed that there was 
some apparent force in her remark, but requested 
that, on her return home, she would ask Mr. R., 
who was still at her father’s house, to read from 
a Greek dictionary the various significations of the 
original terms, to the translations of which in 
this passage he had attached so much importance ; 
and also to point out some of the texts, of which 
there was a great number, where the same words 
had been rendered “to” and “from.” I assured 
her that, if she could persuade him to do this, she 
would never more think the argument which he 
had founded upon them worth a straw, and would 
be ashamed of those who supported their system 


by reasoning so false, and, to uninstructed per- 
7* 


78 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


sons, so delusive. To this I added, that even 
were it otherwise, as the words do not describe 
the act of baptism, but merely what took place 
prior to its administration, they furnished no 
solution of the problem how the ordinance was 
performed, whether by plunging, pouring, or 
sprinkling. 

Having been drawn thus far into discussion, I 
ventured to ask the ladies whether they could 
suppose that this African nobleman would have 
gone down, as he is represented to have done, 
direct from his chariot to be dipped, either in the 
travelling dress which he wore, or in other gar- 
ments put on for the occasion? I inquired, fur- 
ther, whether in the place where this baptism was 
administered, and which was “desert,” it would 
seem at all probable that a suitable spot for 
immersion should have been so easily found? 
And I appealed to the young ladies, whether 
they had not learned enough of Eastern deserts 
while at school to satisfy them that the thirsty 
traveller through such a region is about as 
likely to meet with a stream of gold, as a 
stream of water there, deep enough for such a 
purpose. : 

Whether the mother thought that I was 
making some impression upon her daughters or 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. “79 


not, who seemed amazed at these and other 
arguments, which had hitherto ‘been carefully 
concealed from them, I do not know, but she 
,8oon rose to depart; and as she retired, she 
whispered into my ear, “Do, Mr. George, lay 
aside your carnal reasonings, and take up the 
eross.” I thanked her, smiled, and said good 
morning. 

In the course of that week, several circum- 
stances came to my knowledge which convinced 
me that Mr. R.’s sermon had given the highest 
satisfaction to the Baptists; and I also heard 
that, by some of them, my steadfastness was 
charitably ascribed to pride, obstinacy, and other 
similar causes. All this I should have disre- 
garded, had I not ascertained that Mr. B. had 
not only allowed these unkind surmises to be 
uttered in his hearing without rebuke, but that 
he had helped to give them currency. I learned, 
moreover, that the preacher, also, who remained 
two or three days in the town, had with very bad 
jaste, to say nothing stronger, affirmed that, if 
after such clear and scriptural proofs of immer- . 
sion as he had advanced, I still clung to my 
previous prejudices, he feared that I must be 
sinning against light, and, like the Pharisees, 


80 ° CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


wilfully rejecting the counsel of God against 
myself. 

Affected, and somewhat stung, by these ungen- 
erous and injurious insinuations, I became anxious 
in some way to shield my own reputation, and to 
set forth the reasons which had convinced me that 
immersion had no scriptural support. But how 
to effect these objects, I could not for a time dis- 
cover ; and as I had recently abstained from in- 
tercourse with the Independents in our town, lest 
my change should be ascribed to their efforts, I 
was shut up to my own resources. At length, 
however, I resolved to address a letter to Mr. R., 
stating some of the considerations which compelled 
me to reject the reasonings which he and others 
deemed so irresistible, and containing a remon- 
strance against some of the unworthy methods by 
which, in his discourse, he attempted to bias and 
prejudice his hearers. I determined, moreover, 
to circulate two or three copies of this letter 
amongst the congregation, with the hope that it 
might both vindicate my character and serye the 
cause of truth. This was rather a bold step, and 
I felt it to be so; but my motives had been so un- 
kindly misconstrued, and honour and fairness had 
been so set at naught, that I was impelled to do 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 81 


what, under other circumstances, I should have 
shrunk from. 

Having devoted the spare hours of several days 
to the task, I produced the following epistle :— 


3 


, June, 18—. 


“ Rev. AND DEAR S1R,—From my childhood 
I have regarded your office with reverence, and I 
trust that nothing I am about to write will appear 
to indicate a different state of feeling. 

“J have reason to believe that you are not un- 
acquainted with the fact, that my views have re- 
cently undergone a change on the subject of bap- 
tism; and, if I am not misinformed, when you 
consented to preach at this place a short time since, 
you did so at the urgent solicitation of Mr. B., 
and partly with the design of counteracting the 
consequences which he apprehended might arise 
from my altered sentiments. Iam also aware that 
some strong things have been said to my prejudice 
since the delivery of your sermon, to account for 
what is deemed, by a few, my obstinate adherence 
to error, and, unless I am strangely misled, by 
yourself as well as by others. Now, as I believe 
that, in this matter, I can truly say, ‘ Herein do 
I exercise myself, always to have a conscience void 
of offence,’ I cannot be easy under such imputa- 


82 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


tions; and, in self-defence, I address this letter to 
you, though its contents will also be submitted to 
the consideration of others. 

‘‘ As the principal purpose for which I take my 
pen is to show you that I have sufficient reason 
for rejecting the opinion you so confidently main- 
tained, that there is no baptism but immersion, I 
need not trouble you with a narrative of the cir- 
cumstances which have brought me to this conclu- 
sion. I shall therefore proceed at once to the con- 
sideration of your recently delivered discourse ; 
and if J am able to show that the arguments it 
contained were inconclusive, I think my conduct 
will be entitled to a more kind and candid con- 
struction than it has hitherto received. 

“Tt will be in your recollection that, at the out- 
set of your reasoning, you advanced the bold as- 
sertion that the original term baptizo would bear 
but one signification—that its invariable import 
was to immerse. This, therefore, you assumed to 
be its meaning in your text; and by so doing you 
readily reached the conclusion that immersion 
alone was baptism. Like some other points in 
your sermon, there was a speciousness in this re- 
presentation, which was singularly adapted to cap- 
tivate the ignorant and unreflecting ; but a weaker 
or more worthless fallacy I do not believe the 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 83 


whole sect of the Baptists would have been able to 
construct. It is founded upon two things—a false 
assumption, and a false assertion. The false as- 
sumption is, that the apostle referred, in the words 
‘one baptism,’ to a ritual observance, and not to a 
spiritual privilege,—to the baptism of water, not 
of the Spirit. This you very composedly took for 
granted, and evidently wished your hearers to re- 
gard as a point which no one denied, or would ever 
venture to dispute. Now, did I not suspect that 
you had yourself assumed, without examination, 
the same thing which you wished your hearers to 
assume, I should propose to you the inquiry— 
Was this fair and honourable? To me it appears 
very surprising that any one, who even casually 
looks at the connection in which these words occur, 
should understand them as you did. But it is 
still more extraordinary that vow should so under- 
stand them, who maintain that the term ‘ baptism’ 
means merely ‘immersion’ or a ‘dipping.’ Such 
a translation of the word in this place would alone, 
I should have imagined, have been quite sufficient 
to satisfy any one that the inspired writer must 
have had a different idea in his mind from the 
mere mode of administering a Christian ordinance. 
Eyen upon the theory which you reject, that the 
word baptism means an outward purification, there 


84 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


would be a great incongruity in its introduction in 
the midst of a number of references to subjects 
purely spiritual. But your translation renders the 
incongruity still greater. To see this, you have 
only to substitute the words ‘one dipping’ for 
“one baptism,’ and then to read the entire passage. 
This simple process, with most, would, I am per- 
suaded, be decisive; and if, with this new version 
of your text (and it is your own,) you can believe 
that the inspired writer intended such a reference 
as you suppose—if you can see any propriety in 
his connecting together ‘one faith, one Lord, and 
one God and Father of all,’ with ‘one dipping,’ — 
I can only express my amazement, and ayow my 
fear that nothing I could write would change your 
opinion. All that I could then require from you 
would be the reasons (and they ought to be very 
strong) which induce you to affix a meaning to 
the word ‘baptism’ so out of harmony with the 
context. 

“But I think I can anticipate your method of 
meeting this demand. You will adduce the other 
false assumption, or, more correctly, false asser- 
tion, which was frequently repeated during your 
discourse, that to immerse was the sole signification 
of the original term. To this opinion I have ne 
doubt many of your hearers gave their assent: 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 85 


and if they did not, it was certainly no fault of 
yours; for the statement was so made as to convey 
the strongest assurance to the uninformed that it 
had never been denied, and could not possibly be 
disputed. But, sir, was it right to foster so false 
an impression in an assembly, the great majority 
of whom had never heard a sermon, nor read a 
line, from which they could learn the true state 
of the controversy? Knowing, as you did, that 
many of the most enlightened and eminent divines 
have firmly denied the very thing which you so 
confidently asserted, how could you withhold that 
fact from your congregation, and thus produce 
an erroneous impression? 

«But it is not necessary for me to adduce their 
authority to prove that the word baptize has more 
than one signification. Limited as my knowledge 
of Greek may be, I understand it sufficiently to 
affirm that your assertion is erroneous. Of this, 
the commonist school lexicon will furnish conelu- 
sive evidence. But I will not attempt to discuss 
the classical meaning of the term, nor is it neces- 
sary, since your assertion was confined to its use 
in the New Testament. Yet how you can assign 
such a sense to it there, and particularly in some 
passages, I cannot conceive. Do you really believe 
that the Israelites, who, we are told, were bap- 

8 


86 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


tized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, were 
really dipped, when you know that the cloud 
went ‘before’ them, and that they passed through 
the sea ‘on dry ground? Can you think that 
the apostle, when he calls the various purifica- 
tions of the Jews ‘ divers baptisms,’ only referred 
to dippings, although sprinkling was the ordinary 
mode ordained and practised, and that of which 
he was speaking in immediate connection with 
these words! You are well aware that the terms 
‘washing’ and ‘tables,’ in the common transla- 
tion of Mark vii. 4, are, in the original, ‘bap- 
tizing’ and ‘beds.’ You know, moreover, that 
what in the preceding verse is called the washing 
of their hands is here designated a baptism. ‘The 
following is the literal translation of the passage : 
‘For the Pharisees and all the Jews, except they 
wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradi- 
tion of the elders. And when they come from 
the market, except they baptize, they eat not. 
And many other things there be, which they 
have received to hold, as the baptism of cups, and 
pots, brazen vessels, and beds,’ or couches. Now, 
‘ca you, contrary to the express declaration of 
the Evangelist, that washing the hands (which 
was generally performed by water being poured 
apon them) was a baptism, hold to your assertion 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 87 


that there can be no baptism but the dipping of 
the entire person? And will you adopt, for the 
sake of this worthless theory, the absurd fiction 
that they dipped their bodies and their beds? 
»Again, when on the day of Pentecost the pro- 
phecy of Joel was fulfilled, ‘I will pour out my 
Spirit upon all flesh,’ by the bestowment of that 
divine influence which Peter describes as being 
‘shed forth’ upon them, do you imagine, will you 
venture to declare, that they were then dipped 
with the Holy Ghost? Yet, if you are consist- 
ent, and if the word baptizo has no other mean- 
ing than that which you give to it, you must do 
this; for the very descent of divine influence de- 
scribed as a ‘pouring out,’ and a ‘shedding 
forth,’ was the spiritual baptism which Jesus had 
promised just before his ascension, when he said, 
‘Ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not 
many days hence.’ But seriously, can you im- 
pute to John and to Jesus Christ, what in ordi- 
nary cases you would call the folly of selecting a 
word which signifies ‘to dip and nothing but to 
dip,’ in order to describe a ‘pouring out’ and a 
‘shedding forth?” Had you not a false theory to 
support, [am sure your common sense would re- 
ject as utterly absurd such a meaning of the term 
employed by the Saviour. Similar remarks apply 


88 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


to the case of Cornelius. When Peter saw the 
spirit ‘fai? upon the centurion and his company, 
‘then,’ he states, ‘remembered I the word of the 
Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with 
water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy 
Ghost.’ Was a promise ‘to dip’ with the Holy 
Ghost performed when his influence merely ‘ fell’ 
upon them? Such is the gross absurdity which 
your way of understanding the word baptizo would 
compel you to believe. 

“ But I need not multiply these examples. I 
will therefore proceed to the next topic in your 
discourse. After repeatedly affirming (for argu- 
ment there was none) that baptize always meant 
to immerse, you attempted to support your asser- 
tion by adducing ‘other terms used in the New 
Testament to describe the ordinance.’ These, I 
am confident, were your very words, for they 
attracted my attention so strongly as to imprint 
themselves indelibly upon my memory. For a 
moment after this announcement, I expected some 
startling novelty, and greatly wondered what this 
could be. But imagine my surprise, on discoyer- 
ing that the expressions which were to do so 
much towards deciding the dispute were no others ~ 
than the hackneyed ‘into’ and ‘out of the water,’ 
the inconclusiveness of which in proof of immer- 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 89 


sion has been so often demonstrated. When, 
therefore, I heard you name the 8th chapter of 
the Acts, I could not repress a smile at my own 
simplicity in expecting an original argument on 
the Baptist side of the controversy; but as you 
read the expressions ‘into the water,’ and ‘ out of 
the water,’ repeating the words ‘into’ and ‘out 
of,’ and laying a very heavy emphasis upon ‘in’ 
and ‘out,’ my smile gave place to shame and sor- 
row; and I found it impossible to restrain the 
risings of what I thought then, and think still, 
was a righteous indignation, that a man of sense, 
and a minister of truth, should so pervert the 
meaning of Scripture terms, and impose upon the 
credulity of the people. I reasoned thus within 
myself,—‘ Mr. R. either knows the original of 
this passage, or he does not. If he does not, how 
unworthy and unwarrantable are all his preten- 
sions to knowledge! but if he does, how can he 
venture to handle the word of the Lord thus de- 
ceitfully, and by so doing, not only confirm, but 
studiously convey a false impression! I am 
aware that you did not assert in so many words 
that the ‘into’ and ‘out of’ did by themselves 
describe immersion. Had you so done, there 
would indeed have been less caution, but more 


candour; less contrivance, but greater integrity. 
8x 


90 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


But although you did not so far commit yourself, 
the effect upon your hearers, both of what you said, 
and of what you omitted, was precisely the same 
as if you had told them in plain terms—‘ The 
meaning of into and out of is immerse.’ This was 
my conviction when I heard you; and since then it 
has been confirmed by two circumstances which 
have come under my notice. 

“One of these occurred in a recent conversation 
with Mrs. B., whom you thoroughly convinced, to 
use her own language, that the words ‘meant all 
the same as baptize.’ I met with the other, last 
Sabbath, when, as superintendent of our Sunday 
School, I happened, while writing at my desk, to 
overhear a female teacher of the Testament class 
(one of the very persons, by the way, who were 
baptized after your sermon,) explaining the history 
of Philip and the eunuch to her pupils. As my 
curiosity was excited by the circumstance, and I 
rather wished to hear how she understood the 
words of which you made so sad a use, I remained 
in the same spot until the children read the pas- 
sage in which the prepositions occur, when the 
teacher stopped them, and thus addressed one of 
her pupils. ‘ Well, Jane, who is here said to have 
been baptized? Child—‘The eunuch.’ ‘And 
what is baptism, Eliza?’ ‘To be put under the 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 91 


water, teacher.’ ‘Very true, my dear; and now 
can you tell me where it is said that this was the 
way in which Philip baptized the eunuch?’ For 
a time there was a pause; and on a repetition of 
the question, I saw several of the girls carefully 
conning over the history to find (as I supposed) 
the word ‘dip,’ or some similar expression. But 
the search was ineffectual. Not a child could 
make the desired discovery, or hit upon the answer 
which their teacher required. Upon this, she 
proceeded, as nearly as I can recollect, but I will 
not be confident that I retain every expression, in 
the following strain:-‘I am quite surprised, my 
dears, that you cannot answer my question. No- 
thing can be plainer. Why, is it not said that 
they went down into the water, and came up out of 
the water? and don’t you know that this means 
that the eunuch was immersed? Don’t you re- 
member that Mr. R., when he explained this pas- 
sage to us, said that nothing could be clearer ?’ 
By this appeal the poor children were silenced ; 
but I hope they were wiser than their teacher, and 
far from being satisfied. 

“TJ should not have mentioned these cases, had 
I not been persuaded that they furnish a fair sam- 
ple of the kind of reasoning upon which very many 
Baptists found their belief in the authority of im- 


92 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


mersion. Though young, I have not been unob- 
servant ; and my opportunities of ascertaining the 
class of arguments which are most approved by 
your denomination, and to which its ministers give 
the greatest currency, have been considerable. I 
think, therefore, that without presumption, I may 
venture to affirm that nine-tenths of the members 
of the church in this town are as firmly convinced 
that to go down into, and come up out of the 
water, means to be immersed, as they are that you 
intended to convey to them that impression. Do 
you deny this? Then will you revisit this place, 
and, without any previous intimation of your de- 
sign, will you accompany me to the houses of any 
twenty members of the church, and ask their 
opinion on the point? I will readily abide by 
the result. 

“But you, I am satisfied, require no proof of 
my assertion. You know too much of your own 
denomination. How then can you sanction, still 
more employ, a mode of representation which 
you must be aware only serves to foster a 
very gross misconception? I shall pass over 
your emphatic ‘into’ and ‘out of’ with the 
single remark, that this method of proving im- 
mersion resembled that by which a certain 
preacher proved that the punishment of the 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 93 


wicked must be eternal, because the Scripture 
assures us that it will be not only ‘ for ever,’ but 
for ‘evermore.’ 

“ Leaving you, however, to reconcile your in- 
genious, but certainly not ingenuous device, with 
fairness and truth, permit me to press the in- 
quiry—How could you honestly found your argu- 
ment as you did upon these words? Whatever 
others may imagine, you, I am satisfied, do 
not hold that going down info the water, and 
going down under the water, are one and the 
same thing. You must know that the very 
utmost, which even the least scrupulous and most 
determined Baptist can make these words mean, 
is that the Evangelist and the Ethiopian stood in 
the water. But do they require even this signifi- 
cation, or can you fairly force it upon them? I 
confidently answer, No. And ere the terms can 
be made to serve your purpose thus far, you must 
be prepared to show that it is their constant, or 
- at least their common import. But I am sure 
you are too cautious to affirm any such thing, and 
are well aware of the fact, that in a great number 
of texts they are translated ‘at,’ ‘to,’ or ‘ unto,’ 
and ‘from;’ and moreover, that they would not 
admit of any different rendering. Of this use I 
will present you with two instances; and I might 


94 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


give two hundred. ‘I am not sent but wnto (not 
into) the lost sheep of the house of Israel.’ ‘ And 
his fellow-servant fell down at (not into) his feet.’ 
These are specimens of the use of the word which 
you read into; and how far they sanction or con- 
demn such a disingenuous use of it, I might con- 
fidently leave to every impartial judge. Of the 
sense in which the original word rendered ‘out 
of,’ in the 8th of Acts, often occurs, the following 
are examples. ‘The baptism of John, whence 
was it? From heaven, or of men?” ‘He riseth 
JSrom supper.’ 

“Now, sir, do you suppose that your recent 
hearers in this place could have gathered, or ima- 
gined, from your mode of dealing with these ex- 
pressions, that they were capable of any construc- 
tion but one? I do not ask, whether you im- 
tended to produce the impression that you were 
conveying the only signification they would bear, 
but sure I am that this was the effect both of 
what you said and of what you omitted. ' No one, 
unless they were better informed on the point 
from other quarters, would have conceived, from 
the use you made of the translation, that they 
ever meant ‘in,’ ‘to,’ ‘unto,’ ‘at,’ or ‘from.’ 
And yours, I fear, has not been a solitary case 
of successful delusion in the same line. I know, 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 95 


indeed, that some ministers of your denomination 
are too honourable and too upright thus to impose 
upon the confidence and credulity of their flocks, 
They would scorn, for the sake of a pulpit tri- 
umph, or a party purpose, to withhold from the 
people what was due both to themselves and to 
the truth of God. Instead of declaiming, as you 
did, upon the into and out of, they would confess, 
as indeed some of them have done, that these 
terms decide nothing. 

“And why do any act otherwise? Why do 
they restrict the meaning of these indefinite words, 
and give them in penny tracts and pulpit oratory 
such singular prominence? You may deem my 
explanation of this circumstance rather uncharita- 
ble; but I cannot resist, and I will not conceal the 
conviction that it is done for two reasons. In the 
first place, I believe these words receive so much 
honour because no better proof of immersion can 
be found in the Bible: tolerably conclusive evi- 
dence, by the way, that the whole theory is a castle 
in the clouds. And, in the second place, I cannot 
divest myself of the conviction, that this is also 
dorie because the argument thus obtained is spe- 
cious, and more calculated to captivate the igno- 
rant, and to make converts to your creed, than all 
the elaborate disquisitions of your most learned 


96 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


apologists. Is not this the truth? Do you not 
know, that were you to inform the mass of your 
people that the original words had various mean- 
ings, and decided nothing in favour of immersion, 
their prejudices would be shocked and shaken to 
the very foundation, and that by this single blow 
the strong pillars of their confidence in the divine 
right of dipping would be destroyed? Only try 
the experiment. Preach a thoroughly impartial 
sermon on this passage. Bring forward the paral- 
lel texts; and by these illustrate the various sig- 
nifications of the original terms here translated 
‘into’ and ‘out of,’ and mark the result upon the 
members of your church. What would many of 
them think and say? Would they not suspect 
your orthodoxy, or conclude that you had turned 
Independent? As your candid and truthful expo- 
sitions drew from their fond embrace the mono- 
syllables in which they had long trusted, would 
they not cry out with sorrow and alarm, ‘You 
have taken away our strong confidence,—and what 
have we more ?’ 

“Your next argument in favour of immersion 
was founded upon what you designated ‘ the places 
in which the ordinance was administered.’ When 
I heard you announce your intention of taking this 
ground, I was greatly gratified, because I had pre- 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 97 


viously arrived at the conviction that there was no 
method in which the point in debate might be 
more fairly viewed, or more readily determined. 
Having, moreover, paid particular attention to this 
very point, and having thus had my conviction 
confirmed, that immersion could not have been the 
ordinary mode of baptizing in the primitive age, I 
was rather curious to know how you would deal 
with some of the circumstances in which the ordi- 
nance was administered by the apostles. These, 
instead of sanctioning your practice, had appeared 
to me to furnish the clearest proofs against it; 
and my impression was that no sophistry, nor 
special pleading whatever, could make it appear 
otherwise. And may I add that, notwithstand- 
ing your announcement, as you proceeded I 
could not avoid the suspicion that even you 
held the same opinion? So limited was your 
selection of some places, and so silently did you 
pass over others, that I was constrained to admire 
your discretion, whatever I might think of your 
impartiality. 

’ “Several localities are specified in the New 
Testament where the ordinance was administered. 
John and the apostles, we learn, baptized in 
f@non, Jordan, and Jerusalem, in the city of 
Samaria, in Damascus, in Corinth, in Philippi, in 


9 


98 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


Czesarea, in Ephesus, in a desert, in a private 
house, and in a prison. When, therefore, you 
announced your intention of proving immersion 
from ‘the places’ in which baptism was per- 
formed, your hearers had a right to expect some 
reference at least to the major part of those men- 
tioned in the Acts of the Apostles. But nothing 
could seem to have been further from your 
thoughts. No, sir; not one of these numerous 
spots did you so much as name. As if aware 
that even an allusion to them would damage your 
cause, or defeat your design, you shunned, with 
the utmost caution, Solomon’s porch and the 
other preaching stations at Jerusalem; neither 
did you think it necessary to go through Samaria, 
and visit a city supplied from a solitary well, and 
where, consequently, there could be neither 
‘much water’ nor many Baptists to gladden your 
eyes or help your argument. With equal circum- 
spection, you kept at a safe distance from Damas- 
cus and Czesarea; and would on no account cross 
the boundary of Asia Minor, or look towards 
Ephesus, Corinth, and Philippi. All these were 
‘dry places,’ abandoned to the evil spirits of the 
sprinklers, and very dreadful to those who prac- 
tise dipping. 

“Tt is true you brought us ‘into’ the ‘desert,’ 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 99 


where Philip baptized the eunuch, and kept us 
there so long that we were heartily glad to get 
‘out of’ it again. But, strange to say, you never, 
during all this time, once told us to what place 
we had been allured by your syren tongue, and 
few of your hearers imagined that they were sur- 
rounded by arid wastes and scorching sands. And 
why was this? Did you apprehend that the mere 
name ‘desert’ would have originated reasonings, 
or suggested suspicions unfriendly to your de- 
sign? Were you fearful that it might diminish 
the force or destroy the illusion of the decisive 
‘into’ and ‘out of,’ or that it would instantly dry 
up the broad river with which your heated and 
airy fancy, as with the deceitful mirage which 
mocks the weary traveller, had watered that dry 
and thirsty land? If so, I commend your cau- 
tion. It was admirably prudent. Had you done 
otherwise—had you faithfully described the fea- 
tures of an Eastern desert, and, particularly, had 
you told us the well-known fact that, instead of 
being a place of broad streams and admirable bap- 
tisteries, the only water there is found in a few 
scanty, shrunken, diminutive rills and fountains, 
your reasoning from ‘the places’ in which bap- 
tism was performed would have been sadly 
damaged. And if you had then added, what I 


100 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


presume you must have known, that all the tra- 
vellers since the days of Jerome have failed to 
discover, in the region through which the 
Ethiopian journeyed, any stream deep enough for 
an immersion, the consequences would have 
been, first, the amazement of your confiding 
hearers, and, secondly, the annihilation of your 
poor argument. 

“ After having seen you studiously shun many 
noble cities, I was not surprised at your keeping 
far aloof from the house of Cornelius, and shrink- 
ing with dread from the prison at Philippi. The 
latter, especially in the dead of night, was one of 
the most unpleasant and inconvenient places into 
which a worthy Baptist minister could have been 
thrust; and I question whether he would not find 
jt quite as easy in such a situation to burst the 
prison bolts and bars as to immerse an adult. To 
create a bath or construct a baptistery in an Hast- 
ern dungeon, to change apparel, and make other 
preparations, to stand up to the middle in water 
until the gaoler and family were dipped, and, 
moreover, to do all this in ‘the same hour of the 
night’ on which he was converted, certainly de- 
manded such conveniences and resources as fully 
to justify the dislike with which you turned from 
such a spot and such a service. I know that some 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 102 


of your brethren are ‘very bold;’ and however 
their physical powers may be restrained, they act 
upon the principle that their spirits are free. And 
‘free’ indeed they sometimes are,—so free that, 
finding no good baptistery within the prison walls, 
they have ventured, without authority, to open its 
doors, and to lead Paul with the gaoler and his 
household through the city to some river in the 
neighbourhood ; and having seen the converts well 
dipped in the dark, they have led them back 
again, and safely restored them to their cells, if 
not to the stocks! I do not charge this folly 
upon you, because you acted the wiser part of 
saying nothing on the subject. 

“ And now, sir, permit me seriously to ask, why 
you omitted all these references to ‘the places’ in 
which baptism was administered. Was it because 
the circumstances of Hastern cities, dwellings, 
deserts, and dungeons could throw no light at all 
upon the practice of the apostles? Or was it be- 
cause the light thus obtained would have made 
revelations of which your hearers had never 
dreamed, and have disclosed difficulties and engen- 
dered doubts which would have seriously obstructed 
your design ? 

“ You cannot but know that many wise and up- 
right men reject your theory of baptism, amongst 


9* 


102 CONFESSIONS OF A COMVERT. 


other reasons, because they cannot reconcile it 
with ‘the places’ and circumstances in which the 
rite was originally practised. Now, their objec- 
tions were entitled to your attention, and, before 
you spoke so positively on the point, you ought to 
have noticed them. And I, for one, should have 
been much interested to haye heard by what pro- 
cess, for example, the three thousand could have 
been dipped at Jerusalem on the very day of their 
conviction. As all the apostles must have been 
occupied in this labour at the same time, they 
must have required either a dozen separate baptis- 
teries, or one at least twelve times as large as that 
in which you officiate. Now, it would have been 
a piece of information, as curious as it would be 
valuable, had you even surmised in what part of 
the city, or from what source, especially during 
the passover, when water was so precious, the de- 
spised Galileans could have obtained this large 
supply. It would also have been interesting had 
you suggested how the multitude were so speedily 
prepared for the service, and the whole affair des- 
patched with so much ease and expedition, as the 
inspired narrative would lead us to suppose. You ~ 
do not believe, I presume, that these foreign Jews, 
who had been drawn by mere rumour to the place 
where Peter was preaching, and without the least 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 103 


conception of the result, came there, like those 
whom Mr. B. recently immersed, suitably dressed 
for the occasion, or that each of them brought a 
baptizing suit under his arm. How then was the 
ablution performed? Were they all plunged in 
their ordinary apparel? and after their drench- 
ing, did they in this picturesque condition walk 
back to their places of abode, to the great edi- 
fication of the boys and girls of Jerusalem? Or 
do you suppose that, as soon as they heard the 
command, ‘ Be baptized, every one of you,’ they 
dispersed, and were seen running in every direction 
through the streets of the city to their respective 
dwellings, to procure changes of raiment for the 
purpose? And what do you think of the case of 
the apostles? Had they on the morning of that 
day foreseen the duty they would be called to dis- 
charge? and had they made this necessary provi- 
sion? Something of this kind must have been 
done both by the baptized and the baptizers, if 
the former were initiated by dipping. 

“J could have wished, also, that you had said 
something about the time which must have been 
consumed in this process. When you saw Mr. B. 
baptize seven adults in our chapel, he took about 
half an hour in that service. Now, had he con- 
tinued at the same work, without relaxation, for 


104 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


six hours (the very utmost period which the apos- 
tles could have occupied in baptizing the 3000,) he 
would have administered the rite to about ninety 
persons. Possibly, with great diligence and de- 
spatch, the number might have been doubled, 
though it would have been wet and weary work. 
Now multiply 180 by 12, (the number of the apos- 
tles,) and you will have a total of 2160. A greater 
number than this it must have been physically 
impossible for them to have immersed; but even 
then, nearly a third of the converts would have 
remained unbaptized. And all this supposes that 
no preparation whatever was requisite for the im- 
mersion of this multitude; that every thing was 
perfectly ready, and immediately at hand ; and that 
there was a river or reservoir just at the preaching 
station, with suitable dresses, separate apartments, 
and every other requisite for the service. How 
pleased would many of your hearers have been— 
none more than myself—had you explained how 
all this was accomplished! Considering the cir- 
cumstances, the immersion of so many in so short 
a time must have been almost as miraculous as the 
gift of tongues, or any other of the wonders of that 
memorable day. But you wisely abstained from 
such presumptuous speculations, and discreetly 
avoided the road to Jerusalem. Ah, sir! silence 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 105 


is ofttimes more significant than speech, and such 
circumspect omissions suggest strange surmisings. 

“But although the majority of ‘the places’ in 
which baptism was performed during the first age 
of Christianity was disregarded, you did not, I 
allow, altogether omit a reference to those locali- 
ties. Out of the nine named in the New Testa- 
ment, two have secured the signal favour and 
special patronage of your denomination, and these 
in your recent sermon (most unfairly, I think) 
monopolized your attention. As I listened to you, 
I was forcibly struck with a parallel between your 
case and that of Lot, when he parted company 
with his generous relative. Although the whole 
land of sacred history lay spread out before you, 
Judea, Samaria, Syria, Asia Minor, and Macedo- 
nia, and you had the opportunity of traversing its 
entire extent, you looked over its varied scenery, 
but could discover no ground on which to con- 
struct a theory or raise an argument in favour of 
immersion. No sooner, however, did your wan- 
dering and weary eye rest upon the ‘ well-watered’ 
plains of Jordan, and upon Ainon, with its many 
springs, than, exulting in the imaginary advan- 
tages of such localities for frequent immersions, you 
gladly separated yourself from those who, like Akra- 
ham, fear not to take any direction,—you hastily 


106 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


turned from the dry regions which the apostles 
traversed, and from the arid spots where they bap- 
tized; and, at the risk of higher interests than 
those of a denomination, here you resolved to pitch 
your tent, and found your theory. 

“You may possibly smile at my comparison, but 
I will now turn to topics which should make you 
serious. Permit me, then, to inquire why you 
selected Jordan and Ainon only, and maintained 
throughout your discourse the silence of the grave 
in regard to the features of those more numerous 
places which I have named? And allow me also 
to ask, whether it never struck you as strange that 
you and your brethren, who so loudly profess to 
tread in the steps of inspired men more closely 
than others, and to conform more exactly to their 
proceedings, should be forced to go for their strong- 
est arguments to the practice of John, while they 
shun the path of the apostles. 

“But there is another consideration connected 
with the baptisms of the great forerunner of our 
Lord which deserves your particular attention. - 
You are well aware that the two references upon 
which you rely stand alone. It was John only 
who selected Jordan and A@non, because these 
spots were abundantly supplied with water. No- 
thing of this kind is stated in reference to any of 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 107 


the apostles. Not a syllable occurs in the Acts 
which would sanction the supposition that they 
fixed upon streams for preaching-stations ; and not 
even the most shadowy allusion can be discerned 
which would support the belief that they needed 
much water for their baptisms. On the contrary, 
it is perfectly evident that at all times, and in all 
places, they found enough for this purpose. In- 
stead of going to the Jordan, or to Mnon, they 
obtained, as we have seen, an ample supply on the 
very spots where they delivered their message, 
whether this was done in a city, a dwelling, a dun- 
geon, or a desert. Now how do you account for a 
difference so very marked, and so very remarkable ? 
If John chose these two stations solely because 
they supplied water enough for dipping his disci- 
ples, is it not singular that none of the apostles 
should have ever made any similar selection? 
They also baptized great numbers; and if they 
did this by immersion, it is not easy to explain 
the great difference between his proceeding in this 
respect and theirs. Upon your scheme, it is very 
unaccountable, if much water was necessary 
merely for baptism, that John should have been 
stationary, and the apostles itinerating; that he 
should have been obliged, for the sake of 
sufficient baptismal water, to remain long at 


108 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


Jordan and Alnon, while they went everywhere, 
and, wherever they went, found an ample supply. 

“But there zs a key to this mystery, though it 
is not that which you carried into our pulpit. It 
is found in the peculiar cireumstances of John ; 
and will be easily discovered, if the simple ques- 
tion be but fairly answered,—For what purpose 
did he require water in the greatest quantity, in 
order that he might fulfil his mission, and con- 
tinue his ministrations amongst the multitudes 
that came to his baptism? I need not remind 
‘you (for you have quoted the words often enough) 
that he baptized in AYnon ‘because there was 
much water there.’ Hence it appears that the 
ample supply of this necessary of life was the 
chief motive for this selection. If, then, we can. 
ascertain why water was most needed, we shall in- 
stantly discover the reason of his choice. Was it 
then for the performance of baptism, or for any 
other purpose? Now I readily allow that ‘much 
water’ must have been required, not merely for 
the immersion, but even for the affusion of the 
myriads who came to John’s baptism; but, how- 
ever great the quantity which might have been 
necessary for such a service, the question is this, 
—Was not much, very much, more essential for 
any other use? ‘This is the pivot upon which the 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 109 


explanation of the passage turns. If it can be 
shown that a quantity immeasurably greater than 
would be requisite for the immersion of his fol- 
lowers was in daily demand for a different pur- 
pose, it cannot be supposed that the evangelist 
would have assigned the weaker reason for John’s 
selection of Anon, and have disregarded the 
stronger. 

“Tf you will admit the reasonableness of this 
rule of judging, the dispute may be speedily de- 
cided. In the first place, you have only to com- 
pute the numbers that went to John’s ministry ; 
in the second place, to consider the prodigious 
quantity of water which such a multitude must 
have required for themselves and their cattle; 
and, finally, to compare that quantity with what 
would have been sufficient for their immersion, — 
and the reason of John’s choice will be instantly 
apparent. After such a comparison, could any 
candid person hesitate for a moment to allow that 
immeasurably more water was essential for the 
ordinary use of these myriads than for their bap- 
tism, however administered? And if so, is not 
the inference much more probable that John 
fixed upon the vicinity of Jordan and Anon ‘be- 
cause there was much water there,’ that his nu- 
merous auditors might not be compelled to leave 


10 


110 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


his ministry by the scarcity of this necessary of 
life, than your very unsatisfactory theory? Let 
the two explanations be placed before any impar- 
tial person, and I will readily abide by their de- 
cision. But nothing like this was attempted in 
your sermon. On the contrary, you never uttered 
a syllable which could have led us to suppose that 
there was any purpose whatever for which the 
waters of Ainon might have been required, ex- 
cept that of immersing the people; nor even that 
a different motive for John’s selection ever had 
been, or ever could be assigned. 

“But I must here break for a moment the 
thread of my observations upon this point, for the 
purpose of making a single remark. When you 
founded your argument upon the places which 
John chose, you reasoned in such a manner as t0 
produce the impression that, unless he had been 
within reach of a large stream, he could not haye 
baptized the people; but some of your writers, 
who also insist upon the same point, see no diffi- 
culty whatever in the supposition that the apostles 
dipped 8000 in Jerusalem during a single after- 
noon, and multitudes in other places, as soon as 
they were converted. All this, in their view, was 
very possible; indeed, it was perfectly easy,— 
nothing more so! How it was so easy they do 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 111 


not inform us; but they are infallibly sure of the 
fact. It was absolutely necessary, forsooth, that 
John should have kept hard by Jordan or Anon, 
to obtain sufficient water for iis immersions ; but 
the more favoured apostles could find enough for 
theirs anywhere. I marvel much that the oppo- 
site representations of your advocates, and their 
contradictory reasonings, do not convince you that 
your immersion scheme has in it nothing of the 
coherence and consistency of truth, and that what 
you build up with one hand you are compelled to 
pull down with the other. 

» “But I must return to Anon. And I do this 
in order to ask in what way you conceive it to 
have been possible for John to have fulfilled his 
course, had he ministered in any place which did 
not yield much water? Had he chosen a spot 
where the supply was scanty, would ‘ Jerusalem, 
and all Judea, and all the region round about 
Jordan,’ have gone to his baptism? Great as was 
his fame, would that have been sufficiently attrac- 
tive to overcome the dread of a dry and thirsty 
land, or to have induced a multitude to expose 
themselves in that hot climate, even for a single 
day, to the terrible effects of the want of water ? 
Need I remind you of the motive which prompts 
the wandering Arab to pitch his tent, and the tra- 


112 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


velling caravan to form an encampment? Do you 
not know that they are always influenced by the 
very reason which, I believe, led John to the 
Jordan? Is it necessary for me to adduce evi- 
dence of the fact, that in the Hast a well or water- 


spring has, far beyond any other cause, attracted - 


multitudes to its locality, and caused villages and 
cities to spring up around it? When, therefore, 
you recollect that the attendants upon John’s 
ministry could rarely have been fewer than the in- 
habitants of a large town, and that he continued 


his labours through a part of the year when many - 


of the springs of Judea had failed, must it not be 
evident that, had he not selected a station where 
water was both abundant and unfailing, the mul- 
titudes that came to his baptism could not even 
have been sprinkled, much less supplied and satis- 
fied? He, therefore, wisely fixed upon Anon ; 
and he did this, I am persuaded, for precisely the 
same reason which induced Moses to select another 
and very similar place of sojourn in the wilder- 
ness. ‘And they came to Elim, where there were 
twelve wells of water, and threescore and ten palm 
trees ; and they encamped there by the waters.’ 
“The natural explanation of John’s choice is 
both illustrated and confirmed by other considera- 
tions. In the first place, the literal translation of 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 113 


the original words (as you well know), rendered 
‘much water,’ would be ‘ many waters ;’ and the 
terms evidently designate several small streams or 
wells, like those at Elim, and not a body of water 
fit for a baptistery, such as you would delight in, 
and as your representations, without proof or pro- 
bability, led your unreflecting hearers to believe 
existed in that place. And, secondly, with this 
opinion, but with no other, the facts agree, that 
Josephus, who describes all the principal fountains 
of Judea, never so much as names AMnon ; and, 
further, that a solitary well is all that now remains 
to mark the position of this far-famed source of 
much water and more controversy. 

“ But while I do not believe that the springs 
of Anon were suitable for plunging a multitude, 
Jordan, I grant, was deep enough to dip and 
drown the whole population of the land. In that 
ample stream, indeed, immersion was quite possi- 
ble. But is it probable that the neighbourhood 
of this river was chosen for such a purpose merely, 
when a different supposition accounts so much 
better for its selection? I was just going to say, 
you surely would not found an argument upon the 
expression ‘in’ Jordan: but I had forgotten, for 
a moment, that you did this in your sermon; and 


that, by so doing, you demonstrated still more 
* 


114 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


than before the miserable weakness of a cause 
which required such support,—whilst, moreover, 
if you did not impose upon yourself, you sadly 
misled that portion of your hearers who could be 
caught by the mere sound of words and show of 
argument. Surely, you must know that ‘in,’ 
when used as it is here, before the name of a 
place, commonly signifies ‘at.’ You would, I am 
convinced, admit that this is its meaning, when 
we read ‘7m Anon,’ and ‘im Bethabara.’ And no 
one would hesitate for a moment to admit that the 
words ‘at Ainon,’ and ‘at Bethabara,’ would ex- 
actly convey the import of the expression. Why, 
then, should a different construction be forced upon 
the same term when ‘Jordan’ follows it? Iam 
sure that you can give me none, except it be this: 
that ‘in’ supplies a more plausible argument for 
immersion than ‘at.’ 

‘You and some of your brethren must possess 
an extraordinary measure of that faith which re- 
moves mountains, or I am sure the gigantic diffi- 
culties which oppress your theory of John’s 
baptism would, long ere now, have crushed it to 
the dust. But so far from this, they have not 
made you either stumble or stagger in your adyen- 
turous course of bold assertion. If, for instance, 
the forerunner of Jesus was such a Baptist as you 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 115 


imagine, he must have spent his days up to the 
waist in water, plunging, with breathless haste 
and undiminished vigour, the multitudes who 
flocked to his baptism. Such bodily exercise may, 
in your esteem, differ essentially from that ‘which 
profiteth little ;’ and possibly this mode of living, 
which to me seems more allied to that of the fish 
than of the man, may appear dignified and delight- 
ful. ‘There is no accounting for tastes;’ but I 
have grave doubts whether, even if you survived 
the experiment, a month’s labour, such as you 
impute to John, would not marvellously modify 
your views and feelings, and prepare you to adopt 
those milder measures which you now abhor. Be 
that as it may, it appears to me, and to many 
more, that the wet and weary work which you 
assign to the honoured herald of the Messiah, ané 
in which, if he immersed all his converts, his time 
and energies must have been wholly absorbed, ac- 
cord but very little with the sublime purpose he 
was sent of God to fulfil, or with the certain fact 
that a large proportion of his time was occupied 
in preaching the gospel of the kingdom. 

“To these remarks I have only to add a brief 
reference to the long period which John’s baptisms 
(if they were immersions) must have consumed. 
It was this view of the subject which first shook 


116 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


my faith in your doctrine of baptisms; and the 
more I have considered it, the stronger has the 
conviction grown that it was physically impossible 
for him to have dipped his proselytes. If he did, 
he plunged as many every day as the most expert 
and vigorous immersionist in Christendom could 
now do in a week, and thus performed the work of 
seven weary years in less than one! If you can 
either believe this, or, upon your principle, draw 
from the Scripture history any different conclusion, 
I shall greatly marvel. 

t “But I must now consider your closing argu- — 
ment, and that which you intended to be so in 
more senses than one. It was deduced, you will 
remember, from the words of Paul, ‘buried with 
him in baptism.’ In this metaphor you thought 
you could discover a very distinct allusion to dip- 
ping. NowI had frequently heard this passage 
quoted by Baptists before I heard it from you; 
but I know not how it was that you contrived, 
either by your delivery or your mode of illustra- 
tion, to suggest to my imagination more vivid con- 
ceptions on the subject than I had ever before en- 
tertained. I was constrained, for instance, while — 
Mr. B. was administering the ordinance, to look at 
the whole proceeding as a burial service, the bap- 
tistery as a species of sepulchre, and our worthy 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 117 


pastor as the sexton in this very singular kind of 
interment. All that seemed wanting to render the 
resemblance perfect was, that the officiating per- 
son, instead of descending with the party about to 
be ‘buried in baptism,’ should merely stand on 
one side of ‘the watery grave ;? while a deacon, or 
some other spiritual sub-sexton, stood opposite to 
him, and, with ropes duly adjusted, should have 
slowly let down the body into the baptistery. 

“Tt is possible that, in your expositions of this 
passage, you have not been accustomed to carry 
out the idea quite so far as I did; but yet I think 
you do this rather further than reason or Scripture 
warrants. For what is the effect which your use of 
the term ‘buried in baptism’ must have produced 
upon uninstructed persons? Unacquainted, as 
they are, with the ancient method of entombment, 
they would think merely of a common grave, and 
fancy some resemblance between the lowering of a 
corpse and the plunging of a convert. This, I 
admit, like some of your other representations, is 
well calculated to catch and captivate the ignorant. 
But you know that the idea thus suggested is not 
the sentiment of the passage,—that Paul never 
saw, nor heard of, nor imagined a burial like that 
which is most common amongst ourselves; and, 
therefore, that he could not have intended any al- 


118 CONFESSIONS OF A_OONVERT. 


lusion to it. This, whatever other use you may 
make of the words, you ought to have explained, 
and not to have fostered the delusion which, upon 
this point, is so prevalent amongst the Baptists. 
I do not believe that the apostle alluded to any 
mode of burial; but if he did, it is self-evident 
that it must have been, not to a mode like ours, 
which was then unknown, but to that which was 
practised in Judea. What that was, you know. 
Instead of lowering the body into a grave, it was 
carried into a cave or chamber, such as the sepul- 
chres of our Lord and Lazarus, and there placed 
on a shelf, or in a niche, ‘as the manner of the 
Jews was to bury.’ Did your late hearers dream 
of this, when you declaimed to them about being 
‘buried in baptism? Had they known the simple 
fact which I have just stated, and been compelled 
to seek for a correspondence between a burial in 
Judea and a baptism in Salem Chapel, how per- 
plexed, how confounded would they have been! 
That most elaborate part of your sermon, sir, would 
have only confused, instead of convincing them. 
An acquaintance with Jewish rites and Oriental 
customs is, generally, in high repute, on account 
of the light which this knowledge throws upon 
many Scripture allusions. Would that this branch 
of biblical literature was more cultivated by your 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 119 


denomination! It would, I am convinced, greatly 
promote the right understanding of God’s word ; 
but—it would annihilate your most popular argu- 
ments for immersion. - 

“But, however important the knowledge of 
ancient usages might generally be, it is by no 
means necessary to destroy the illusion created 
by your misapplication of the words ‘buried in 
baptism,’ if you would only translate them in 
exact accordance with your theory and practice. 
If, instead of saying ‘buried in baptism,’ you 
were tosay ‘buried in dipping,’ I feel convinced 
that all your rhetoric would fail to produce the 
belief that a representation so strange and sense- 
less could have proceeded from an inspired pen. 

“Hitherto my reasoning upon these misused 
expressions has been founded upon the assump- 
tion that they contain some reference, at least, to 
baptism by water, if not (as you imagine) to the 
mode of its administration. This, in your ser- 
mon, you quietly took for granted, as many of 
your brethren had done before you. But, in 
reality, is there any such reference either in the 
6th of Romans, or ina parallel passage in the 2d 
of Colossians? Is it quite so evident as you ap- 
peared to think that Paul spake merely of an out- 
ward rite, or ceremonial observance? Might he 


120 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


not have intended to describe an inward opera- 
tion, a spiritual cleansing? The word ‘baptism’ 
alone decides nothing on this point. It may, in- 
deed, designate the application of water, but it 
may refer to the influence of the Holy Spirit. 
This, surely, you will not dispute. The ‘ promise 
of the Father,’ which Jesus left with his disciples 
when he ascended to his throne, was this,—‘ Ye 
shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost;’ and in 
these words he described, as John had done be- 
fore him, the grand peculiarity of the Christian 
dispensation. Why the word ‘baptism’ was thus 
specially selected td describe divine influence, I 
need not stay to inquire; but that it was so 
selected .is certain, and, doubtless, amongst other 
reasons, because no term beside was equally ex- 
pressive. Sanctioned, then, and sanctified as this 
word was, by John and Jesus, to designate that 
spiritual influence which renews the heart, is it 
probable that the apostles should never have 
called the same blessing by the same name? 
Nothing would seem more unlikely than this. 
On the other hand, nothing could be more reason- 
able than to expect that they should, in this mat- 
ter, conform to the teaching of their Master, and 
use the term ‘baptism’ as he had used it, to de- 
seribe the Spirit which he had given them. 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 121 


Whether they have done so can only be ascer- 
tained by carefully considering the connection in 
which the word is found. 

_ TI shall, therefore, proceed to the paragraphs 
where the words ‘buried in baptism’ and ‘by 
baptism’ occur. And I am persuaded, that if you 
will but lay aside the sectarian spectacles through 
which you have been accustomed to look at these 
isolated expressions, ascertain the leading senti- 
ment and scope of the passages of which they 
form a part, and compare them with other meta- 
phorical terms of the same kind with which they 
are connected, your confidence in the argument 
which you founded upon them in favour of ‘im- 
mersion’ will be somewhat shaken. 

“T cannot here give a very minute and ex- 
tended exposition of the passages which contain 
the doubtful term. There are, however, two 
or three considerations which would, I think, 
carry the conviction to any unbiassed mind 
that in both the apostle refers solely to a 
spiritual state. 

“1st. It will not, I believe, be questioned 

that every other term employed in connection 
with the words ‘baptize’ and ‘baptism’ in these 
Scriptures describes spiritual blessings. A dif- 
ferent signification can scarcely be given to the 

11 


122 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


following expressions, which form parts of the 
passage in the Epistle to the Romans: ‘dead te 
sin,’ ‘planted together in the likeness of his 
death,’ ‘ our old man crucified with him, that the 
body of sin might be destroyed,’ ‘freed from sin,’ 
‘dead with Christ,’ ‘dead, indeed, unto sin.’ 
Now, in the very midst of these descriptions of 
the great spiritual change through which all 
believers have passed, we meet with the words, 
‘Know ye not, that so many of us as were bap- 
tized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his 
death? Therefore we are buried with him by 
baptism into death.’ Why, then, should these 
words be supposed to refer to a mere sign, whilst 
all the others describe the thing signified? It is 
not very probable that Paul intended to treat of 
two subjects in one single paragraph. Neither 
was it usual with him to compound things that 
differ so completely, as he has done in this place, 
if some of his references are to the baptism of 
water, and others to the renewing of the Holy 
Ghost. And why should such an unnatural sup- 
position be entertained? It surely is not fayour- 
able to the clear comprehension of the passage, — 
however useful it may be deemed to countenance 
immersion. 

“Similar remarks apply to the parallel state- 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 123 


ments in the Epistle to the Colossians. Here, in 
the closest possible connection with the words 
‘buried with him in baptism,’ Christians are de- 
scribed as ‘complete’ in Christ, ‘ circumcised with 
the Circumcision made without hands, in putting 
off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circum. 
cision of Christ,’ ‘risen with him through the 
faith of the operation of God,’ and ‘ quickened to- 
gether with him.’ Now, why assign a totally 
different sense to figures so very similar as those 
which are here brought together, apparently at 
least to illustrate one subject, and that subject 
purely spiritual? I cannot discover the least 
reason why this should have been done. Without 
referring to the other expressions, though they 
strengthen the argument, it may suffice to select 
two of the words which are here introduced toge- 
ther, ‘circumcision’ and ‘baptism.? The former 
of these you would, I suppose, acknowledge to be 
entirely figurative. This indeed is unquestion- 
able, because many of the Christians at Colosse, 
being Gentiles, were, in a literal sense, uncircum- 
cised. But if it is certain that the term ‘ circum- 
cision’ was used to designate a purely spiritual 
state, ‘the circumcision of the heart,’ is it proba- 
ble that Paul intended the similar term ‘ baptism’ 
to denote a merely external ordinance? If the 


124 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


one describes what is spiritual, why should not 
the other? Strong reason ought to be assigned 
for so strange a difference. 

“2d. But this conclusion obtains additional 
support from other expressions which stand in 
connection with the disputed terms. It is said, 
for example, that we are ‘baptized into Jesus 
Christ,’ and ‘into his death ;’ that we are ‘ buried 
with him, by baptism, into death,’ clearly the 
death which the apostle describes in the same sen- 
tence as being ‘dead to sin.’ Could this have 
been affirmed of water baptism? Is the external 
rite in any sense a baptism ‘ énto Christ,’ or ‘ into 
death?” Do we thus ‘die indeed unto sin,’ or is 
this great change wrought by the better baptism 
of the Holy Spirit? Moreover, those who are 
said to be ‘ baptized into death’ are also described 
as ‘raised wp from the dead,’ by the same bap- * 
tism. This is most evident from the following 
statement in the Epistle to the Colossians. 
‘Buried with him in (or by) baptism, wherein 
(or whereby) also ye are risen with him.’ Hence 
it is most evident, whatever the operation may be, 
whether of water or of the Spirit, that it is one 
by which we pass from death unto life. But how 
is this wrought? By what agency are we raised 
into newness of life? The apostle shall answer 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 125 


these questions, and decide the doubtful case. 
In one of the two passages he tells us that this is 
done ‘by the glory of the Father;’ and in the 
other, ‘through the faith of the operation of 
God.’ I can scarcely suppose that you would 
assign two causes, a ritual and a spiritual, for 
the production of one joint effect, or maintain 
that the death and burial of a believer are 
effected by an outward ordinance, while his re- 
surrection is wrought by the glory of the Father 
and by faith. And yet I know not how you 
can do otherwise, if you hold to that interpre- 
tation of the text which you advanced in your 
discourse. 

‘These, however, are not the only parts of the 
context which throw light upon the words ‘ bap- 
tized into his death,’ and ‘buried with him in 
baptism.” If you will read again the passage 
in the 6th chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, 
you will find the four different, but yet very 
similar terms, ‘dead,’ ‘buried,’ ‘crucified,’ and 
‘raised,’ introduced in immediate connection, and 
apparently to illustrate the same subject. Now, 
is it probable that representations so closely 
related to each other should be thus connected, if 
some of them were intended to describe an 
outward rite, and others an inward renovation? 

1i* 


126 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


On the contrary, would it not be far more ac- 
eordant with ordinary rules and apostolic usage 
to understand the ‘death’ and the ‘crucifixion,’ 
the ‘burial’ and the ‘resurrection,’ in reference 
to one and the same great spiritual change? 

‘3d. I have yet another consideration to sub- 
mit to you in confirmation of the view now ad- 
vanced. It is this: that if the apostle, in these 
passages, refers to a symbolical ordinance merely, 
he unquestionably ascribes to it effects which you 
would trace to a much higher source ; or, in other 
words, he teaches the doctrine of baptismal regen- 
eration. This neither of us will admit; but how, 
with your view of the meaning of the word ‘ bap- 
tism,’ you can deny it, I do not understand. He 
says, you will remember, that we are ‘ buried with 
Christ, by baptism, into death.’ He does not, you 
perceive, state merely that baptism resembles a 
burial, but that it 7s so. Whatever the baptism 
of which he speaks may be, he represents it as the 
instrument of the Christian’s spiritual death and 
burial. It introduces him ‘ into death,’—it buries 
him with Christ; and in the parallel passage, as 
we have seen, he ascribes the Christian’s spiritual 
resurrection from the dead to the same cause. 
Now, what can that baptism be, by which we thus 
die unto sin and live unto righteousness, but the 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 127 


same which Peter says ‘saves us?” And is this 
the baptism of water, or of the Holy Ghost? The 
apostle just named answers the question, by affirm- 
ing that itis ‘not the putting away the filth of 
the flesh, (7. e. not a mere external purification,) 
but the answer of a good conscience towards God.’ 
And to me it seems amazing that any evangelical 
Christian can take a different view, or imagine 
that the inspired writer intended to teach us that 
we are in any sense dead unto sin, and buried 
with Christ, by a mere immersion of the body in 
water. 

“JT am deeply convinced that your interpreta- 
tion of these words unintentionally countenances 
the deadly delusion of baptismal regeneration. By 
attaching, as you do, such peculiar importance to 
this single ordinance, and supporting a literal in- 
terpretation of the term ‘baptism,’ in the texts 
under consideration, you are giving your sanction 
to a class of teachers, and a system of error, with 
which, in all other points, you have no sympathy. 
I was much impressed by this conviction a short 
time since, when calling at the house of one of our 
absentee Sunday scholars. I saw a tract lying on 
the table, which had been just left there by the 
curate of our parish, who is a semi-papist and a 
zealous advocate of sacramental efficacy. It was 


128 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


published, I think, by the Christian Knowledge 
Society, and professedly written to prove baptismal 
regeneration. Having requested permission to 
peruse it, I was not a little struck to find that the 
two passages upon which I have been commenting, 
and particularly the words ‘baptized into Jesus 
Christ,’ and ‘buried with him, by baptism, into 
death, were relied upon as main pillars of that 
dangerous heresy. Having returned the tract, I 
am unable to quote it extensively, but I well re- 
member one passage. ‘In these words St. Paul 
describes the greatest spiritual change which can 
be experienced,—a death unto sin, and a life unto 
righteousness. And this he expressly assures us 
is wrought im baptism, or ‘by baptism,’—words 
which clearly point to the instrument by which it 
is effected. What, therefore, can be plainer from 
hence than that baptism is the sacrament of regen- 
eration?” And how, with your view of the import 
of the word in these Scriptures, you could rebut 
this reasoning, or avoid this conclusion, I cannot 
conceive. To me it appears that the doctrine of 
baptismal regeneration inevitably follows from your 
interpretation. 

«‘ What I have hitherto written has been merely 
in reply to your leading arguments for immersion ; 
and I have abstained from direct evidence in fa- 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 129 


vour of a different mode. Nor is such evidence 
necessary to justify the course which I have re- 
cently taken. If it can be shown that immersion 
could not have been commonly practised in apos- 
tolic times, it will follow that some more simple and 
significant mode must then have been inuse. Whe- 
ther this was pouring, or sprinkling, or both, cannot 
now be certainly ascertained from the sacred writ- 
ers. Upon these immaterial points they are just 
as silent as they are respecting immersion. In 
your sermon, you demanded a single passage which 
required sprinkling ; but, surely, you had forgot- 
ten that your brethren, with equal firmness, but 
with no better success, ask you to produce a com- 
mand to be immersed. There is neither,—a pretty 
clear evidence that the author of this service did 
not attach to the method of its observance that 
measure of importance which is ascribed to it by 
you~ My belief is—and I found it, amongst other 
reasons, upon the absence of minute direction re- 
specting the mode—that the essence of the rite 
consists in the application of water to the body 
(irrespective of method or quantity) as an emblem 
of spiritual truths. And I believe, also, that mode 
to be the best by which these truths are most 
vividly represented to the mind. What this is 
can, I think, be a matter of inference only. Your 


130 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


inference favours immersion; mine affusion. In 
that method you discern a symbol of the Spirit’s 
operations. But this I cannot discover. In sprink- 
ling or pouring, on the contrary, there appears to 
me a beautiful and most expressive image of these 
operations,—an image which, in my view, shadows 
forth as vividly as any visible act could do things 
spiritual and divine. 

“‘T shall now bring this letter to a close. But 
before I do so, permit me to present two or three 
questions for your candid consideration. And, in 
the first place, I would request you to reflect, whe- 
ther your mode of baptism agrees either with the 
Scripture doctrine of divine influence, or with those 
accurate representations on this subject which you 
are accustomed to address to your hearers. In 
the sacred writings, we are taught that the Holy 
Spirit is the gift of God,—that his influences are 
poured out upon us from on high. But is this the 
idea which your mode of baptizing is adapted to 
convey? When you take a convert and plunge 
him under the water, do you imagine that such an 
act would easily and naturally suggest the truth, 
that the sacred influence which the water repre- 
sents is shed down upon us from God? Is there 
the slightest correspondence between such a doc- 
trine and such a practice? On the contrary, is 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 13] 


there not between them the utmost variance? If 
immersion is adapted to teach anything it is this, 
that we are applied to the Spirit, not that the 
Spirit is applied to us,—that our souls must be 
dipped in his influence, not that his influence must 
descend upon our souls. Did I not know that on 
this point your preaching was more sound than 
your practice, and that the orthodoxy of the pulpit 
would counteract the heterodoxy of the baptistery, 
I should contemplate your immersions with serious 
alarm. 

“‘ But permit me, in the second place, to inquire 
how you can account for the remarkable disagree- 
ment between your mode of symbolizing divine 
influence, and that which God had enjoined and 
sanctified under the former dispensation. As the 
spiritual grace is the same in all ages, it would be 
natural to expect that, if symbols were employed 
at all, the mode of their employment would also 
be the same. And this, I believe, will be found 
to have been the fact. Now of all the “ divers 
baptisms”” administered under the law, there was 
not one which resembled yours. In no single in- 
stance did priest or Levite plunge the people. Of 
this the evidence is complete. But sprinkling, on 
the contrary, was constantly employed. If, then, 
this mode, enjoined by God to represent the shed- 


132 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


ding forth of his Spirit, was for ages deemed best 
suited for this purpose, why should it have been 
superseded by another, certainly not more expres- 
sive, and as I conceive much less so? Can you 
discover any good reason for such:a change, or 
indeed any reason at all? And is there any au- 
thority for it? I can neither imagine the one, 
nor diseover the other. And, therefore, in the 
absence of both, I cling to the consecrated symbol, 
and would even venture to offer the advice that, 
in your future discourses on baptism, you speak 
with less dogmatism and contempt concerning a 
mode of baptizing originally selected by infinite 
wisdom, and consecrated for ages, as the emblem 
of the Spirit’s grace. . 

“There is a third question with which I am 
tempted to trouble you. It is this; How, upon 
your views, do you account for the circumstance 
that, in all the predictions and promises of the 
Holy Spirit contained in the Old Testament, you 
never meet with any allusion to divine influence 
which agrees with your favourite mode of repre- 
senting it? Had God intended to appoint immer- 
sion as the standing and only symbol of the Spirit’s 
operation to the end of time, might we not have 
expected to find some metaphor or some reference 
in accordance with this practice? But there is 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 133 


none. Nota line, not a word occurs in psalms or 
prophecies which alludes, even in the most remote 
manner, to dipping, plunging, or any such mode 
of employing the element which God has conse- 
erated for the service of his sanctuary. But while 
there is not a syllable which agrees with immer- 
sion, there are several very striking descriptions 
of the dispensation of the Spirit which allude to 
the mode which you reject. Need I remind you 
of such passages as the following? ‘Then will I 
sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be 
clean.’ ‘So shall he sprinkle many nations.’ ‘I 
will pour water upon him that is thirsty, and floods 
upon the dry ground: I will pour my Spirit upon 
thy seed, and my blessing upon thine offspring.’ 
‘ And it shall come to pass afterwards that I will 
pour out my Spirit upon all flesh.’ Now, how is 
this? With the importance which you attach to 
your mode of baptizing, how do you account for 
the very strange circumstance (to say the least of 
it,) that numerous prophecies of the descent of the 
Holy Ghost should exactly agree with affusion, 
but never with immersion ? 

“ And between these prophetic representations 
of the Old Testament, and the history of their 
accomplishment in the New, the accordance is 
most exact. Here we read that the Holy Spirit 

12 


134 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


‘came upon’ those that received him; that he 
‘fell upon’ them, was ‘shed upon’ them, and was 
‘poured upon them. Now, as visible symbols 
and audible sounds are only two forms of lan- 
guage—the one addressed to the eye, the other to 
the ear—we might therefore naturally expect, 
when both are employed to represent one thing, 
that some correspondence would be found between 
the mode of representation. And this correspond- 
ence exists between the ‘divers baptisms’ of the 
law (which were principally sprinklings) and the 
manner in which the prophets describe the divine 
influence, of which these sprinklings were the 
sign. Why, then, should no such agreement 
appear under the gospel? While the same ver- 
bal form is retained, what reason can be assigned, 
or imagined, why the visible should be changed ? 
Why should the counterpart of a promise to pour 
out be found in the very different mode of 
plunging in? And why, moreover, should a 
long consecrated symbol of the Spirit’s influence 
be superseded by another, which presents no ac- 
cordance whatever with the language either of the 
Old Testament or of the New? Howis all this 
to be explained ? 

“But I must trouble you with one question 
more, and it shall be the last. Without asking 


REASONINGS AND REPLIES. 135 


you to account for the singular circumstance 
(singular, I mean, if the word ‘baptism’ only 
signifies immersion) that, when the Saviour’s 
promise—‘ Ye shall be baptized with the Holy 
Ghost’—was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost, the 
Spirit was ‘shed forth’ upon them, I should like 
much to know how it could have happened, when 
Peter saw that ‘the Holy Ghost fell upon’ Corne- 
lius and his company, that then ‘he remembered 
the word of the Lord, Ye shall be baptized with 
the Holy Ghost?’ Believing, as you do, that the 
word baptize describes a mode of applying the 
body to water, and that mode to dip, Iam sure 
that anything which ‘fell’ upon a person would 
never remind you of a baptism. It would be one 
of the very last things to suggest such an idea. 
How, then, did it happen that the descending 
symbol of divine influence had precisely the oppo- 
site effect upon Peter’s mind which it must have 
had upon yours? Why did such an action, 
unless there was a correspondence between it and 
the usual mode of baptizing, bring an idea to the 
apostle’s thoughts that no IJmmersionist would 
have ever entertained? Surely he must have had 
very different associations with the word baptism 
from those which your practice is calculated to 
form. And I see not how to account for this 


136 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


difference, except upon the supposition that Peter 
had been accustomed to administer the ordinance 
by pouring, whilst you deem dipping a more ex- 
cellent way. 

“But I will now close these remarks. If I 
have spoken with honest freedom, forgive me. 
My object has been to put my points with plain- 
ness of speech, because this letter is designed for 
other eyes besides yours. 

“ Believe me,” &c. 


PAteL LV: 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 


One Sabbath afternoon, a few days prior to the 
appearance of the foregoing letter, I went, by in- 
Vitation, to take tea at the house of one of the dea- 
cons of the church, where I was soon joined by 
another gentleman who sustained the same office. 
Under all the circumstances of the case, I was 
somewhat surprised at the apparent friendliness of 
this proceeding, because I was aware that both 
these gentlemen were much displeased with me 
on account of my recent conduct. But the 
mystery of this unexpected act of courtesy was 
soon dispelled; and I discovered that the meeting 
had been concerted with the benevolent design 
of rescuing me from the error into which I had 
fallen. 

It was, however, with no small difficulty that 
the brethren brought on the discussion upon 
which they were intent; for they were evidently 
anxious that I should not divine their purpose, 

12* (187) 


138 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


and I was not a little amused at their awkward 
attempts to introduce the subject. In no respect 
indisposed to discuss the point upon which they 
apparently deemed themselves invulnerable, I, at 
length, frankly stated what I supposed to be 
their design, and begged them to throw off all re- 
straint in conveying to me their opinions. Upon 
this one of them, after expressing his high re- 
spect for my parents, and the hope which he had 
entertained that I should have trod in their 
footsteps, added, “But I am exceedingly sorry, 
my dear young friend, to find that you hesitate 
to take up the cross and follow Christ.” Had I 
not been familiar with the phraseology in current 
use amongst the Baptists, I might have mistaken 
this for a lamentation over my religious indeci- 
sion, and should never have conceived that it 
merely referred to doubts on the subject of im- 
mersion. But I had been initiated into these 
mysteries long enough to know the sense in 
which these terms were employed, and, in 
consequence, was scarcely surprised at the arro- 
gant assumptions which they involved. I there- 
fore replied by simply saying that, in declining 
immersion, I was quite unconscious of having 
disregarded either the precept or example of the 
Saviour. 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 139 


I was proceeding to advance more in self-defence, 
but my lecturer interrupted me with the question, 
“ What! did not Jesus Christ say—‘ Thus it be- 
cometh us to fulfil all righteousness?” ””? and then 
added, in a style meant to be singularly solemn, 
but with intonation and emphasis quite original, 
the following lines from Rippon’s Hymns :— 


“Hear the blest Redeemer call you, 
Listen to his gracious voice ; 
Dread no ills that can befall you, 
While you make his ways your choice. 
Jesus says, ‘ Let each believer 
Be baptized in my name ;’ 
He himself im Jordan’s river 
Was immersed beneath the stream.” 


The good man’s elocution, the tone of satisfaction 
with which he recited the last two lines, and the 
expression of the mingled complacency with him- 
self and compassion for me with which he fixed 
his eyes upon mine, as I sat gazing at him with 
mute surprise, overcame me; and a propensity, for 
the indulgence of which (though prevention was 
often impossible) I had been repeatedly punished 
at school, proved irresistible, and I so far lost the 
power of self-control that, in spite of every effort, 


140 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


I burst into a loud laugh. It was a sad slip. I 
saw instantly that it had exposed me to just cen- 
sure, and my character to much misconstruction. 
This soon repressed my risibility, which otherwise 
would have been only increased by the severe 
frown with which it was met, and the sad lamen- 
tations over my levity. Having endeavoured, as 
well as I could, to convince the good man that it 
was far from my intention to treat either him or 
his opinions with disrespect, I recurred to his quo- 
tation, expressed my desire to do whatever the 
Saviour had enjoined, and requested him to fur- 
nish me with a proof of the assertion that he “ was 
immersed beneath the stream.” 

- My demand was readily met in the usual way. 
Without a moment’s hesitation he quoted Mark i. 
9, where it is said that Jesus “was baptized of 
John im Jordan.” The emphatic manner in which 
he pronounced the preposition “in” created the 
suspicion that he understood it to mean “ under;” 
and I therefore asked him whether he considered 
the words “in Jordan” to mean that our Lord was 
plunged below the surface of that river, or, accord- 
ing to the language of the hymn, that he “was 
immersed beneath the stream?” Having answered 
in the affirmative, I requested him to turn to the 
fourth verse of the same chapter, where it is said 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 141 


that “‘ John did baptize 7m the wilderness ;” and I 
then inquired whether he did not believe that the 
word “in” must have the same signification in 
both passages. Upon this he began carefully to 
con over and collate the two verses, and kept me 
waiting some time for his reply; and, as if he felt 
a vague premonition of the consequence of answer- 
ing my question in the affirmative, he expressed hig 
desire to know why I had put it to him, and said 
“che could not exactly see what the wilderness had 
to do with the subject.” As, however, I would 
neither satisfy his curiosity, nor withdraw my de- 
mand, he at length admitted, though with evident 
reluctance, that “he supposed it might be so.” 
“Well then,” I added, “‘ you must be aware that 
the wilderness of Judea was about as full of sand 
as the channels of the Jordan were full of water. 
If, therefore, the words ‘ baptized in Jordan’ mean, 
as you suppose, ‘being immersed under the water 
of that river,’ must not the similar expression, 
‘did baptize in the wilderness,’ mean ‘ being im- 
mersed under its sand? Besides,” I added, “in 
a text to which Baptists are particularly partial, 
it is said that ‘John was baptizing i Ainon;’ 
which you are aware was not a river, but a place. 
Now you do not, I presume, believe that he im- 
mersed his followers wader Ainon: and yet you 


142 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


have precisely the same reason for believing this 
that you have for thinking that they were im- 
mersed under Jordan.” 

The good man sat staring, and, as I thought, 
startled at the discovery which I had made to him ; 
but instead of attempting to strengthen his posi- 
tion, or extricate himself from the difficulty into 
which his bold assertion had brought him, he 
began to expatiate upon the qualities of the tea, 
and to apologize for taking an extra cup. This 
parenthesis having been filled up, I again requested 
his attention to the point which I had presented, 
when he said, “ But if the words ‘in Jordan’ do 
not mean to be immersed, tell me what can they 
mean?” “That,” I replied, “is not my business ; 
but yet I have no objection to comply with your 
request. In the first place, then, for the reason 
which I have stated, it is very certain, whatever 
else they may signify, that the expressions cannot 
bear the sense which you put upon them. ‘This, 
undoubtedly, is not the idea which they naturally 
suggest; it never entered into any head but that 
of a Baptist, and can only be received by giving 
to the word ‘in’ a meaning which would, were the 
same signification retained in seyeral other passa- 
ges, render them sheer nonsense. But,” I added, 
“there is no difficulty in answering your question. 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 143 


Baptists, in common with others, understand the 
words ‘in the wilderness,’ ‘in /AMnon,’ and ‘in 
Bethabara,’ to mean ‘a?’ those places; and why 
should not the passage ‘in Jordan’ have a similar 
signification? Why, instead of bearing its usual 
import, when it occurs before the name of a place, 
should the word ‘in’ here, and here only, be ren- 
dered ‘into’ or ‘under?’ Do show me the reason 
of this strange difference, and explain why the two 
passages might not change places, and be as fairly 
rendered ‘at Jordan,’ and ‘wnder Adnon,’ as ‘at 
f®non,’ and ‘under Jordan?’ ” 

Upon this a short pause ensued; and then the 
other deacon (in order, as I thought, to raise the 
siege, with which his brother was sorely oppressed) 
demanded of me how John administered the rite, 
if it was not by immersion. I replied, “ that this 
was a point upon which no one could speak with 
confidence, because the inspired writers themselves 
had attached so little importance to the mode of 
baptism, that they had not penned asingle syllable 
on the subject. We were, therefore,” I added, 
“left entirely to inference ;” and I then proceeded 
to state my reasons for this belief, that either 
pouring or sprinkling must have been generally 
employed in the service. As, however, most of 
these have already appeared in the preceding 
pages, I will not repeat them here. 


144 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


Although closely engaged with the two breth- 
ren, I did not fail to remark that the servant, who 
had passed round the tea, and who was a member 
of a Wesleyan Society in the town, was very 
deeply interested in the conversation; and that at 
the close of the refreshment she made much unne- 
cessary work for herself, and, without appearing 
to listen, was evidently lingering in the room for 
that purpose. I learned afterwards that the poor 
girl had been beset by master, mistress, and minis- 
ter; and, but for the well-directed instructions of 
her class-leader, would in all probability have been 
beguiled, as many uninformed young women had 
been before her, by strong assertions, and two or 
three worthless plausibilities, to renounce her early 
dedication to God, and, without the slighest war- 
rant to be re-baptized. 

Shortly after this interview my letter appeared, 
and created no small stir in our congregation. 
Moreover, I soon discovered that I had incurred 
the displeasure of many of them. Some, with 
whom I had been acquainted from my childhood, 
became cool and distant. Others, who wished to 


keep up the appearance of friendship, could with 


difficulty disguise their dislike. A few, with more 
courage, ventured in different ways to set before 
me the evil of my doings. One old gentleman 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 145 


turned up his eyes, and shook his head, at what 
he termed “the forwardness and presumption of 
so young a man” as myself, in writing as I had 
done to an experienced minister like Mr. R. 
Another was quite shocked at the “impiety” with 
which I had attacked what, with an air of infalli- 
bility, he assumed to be an ordinance of God. By 
some, it was whispered that I had been influenced 
by sinister motives; and a brother of our pastor 
boldly avowed his belief that I had been drawn 
into the snare of the devil, and had reason to dread 
the judgment which befell Elymas for perverting 
the right ways of the Lord. Some of the softer 
sex, with whom, in general, I had been rather a 
favourite, became all at once intensely bitter in 
their feelings against me, and very strong in their 
denunciations. Two of these even volunteered a 
visit of condolence to my mother, whose sorrow 
in having such a son they supposed must have 
been most severe. 

There was one of our members who deemed 
himself a very “mighty man” in this controversy, 
because he had published a small tract of quota- 
tions from Peedo-baptist writers copied from Booth, 
which were thought to countenance immersion,— 
a common but most contemptible mode of attack, 
oa in Baptists, who profess to repudiate 


146 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


human authority, and to draw their arguments 
solely from Scripture. This champion of the 
cause had made no secret of his intention to take 
me to task, as he phrased it; and I was accord- 
ingly forewarned of the danger to which I stood 
exposed. 

I was not surprised, therefore, when, one after- 
noon, he presented himself at our counting-house ; 
though, I confess, it was just then with considera- 
ble reluctance that I laid aside some intricate ac- 
counts which I was endeavouring to balance, and 
entered the polemical arena with this new combat- 
ant. He did not, however, give me any chance 
of evading the subject; but began almost imme- 
diately to utter his surprise and regret that I 
should have forsaken “the old paths,” in which 
my excellent father had so steadily walked. Hay- 
ing assured him that what I had done was the 
result of anxious thought and much prayer, he 
expressed his conviction that I was deluding my- 
self, and wondered that I should have “set up” 
my judgment against such men as Baxter, Burkitt, 
and some others whom he named. [I replied that, 
instead of setting up my judgment, I had endea- 
voured to lay it down, and learn at the feet of Je- 
sus what he would have me do. “ But have you 
read my ‘Cloud of Witnesses?” ” he hurriedly in- 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 147 


quired. “T have, sir.” ‘Well, and did not that 
satisfy you?” “Yes, sir, it did most perfectly on 
one point.” “Ah! I am glad to hear that—very 
glad. I thought a young man of your intelligence 
would be convinced by names of such weight. I 
rejoice in it, my dear sir; I do, indeed. Still, it 
is no more than I might have expected from you; 
and I am thankful that any humble performance of 
mine should have yielded satisfaction to a doubting 
but upright mind like yours.” 

How long the loquacious tractarian would have 
gone on in this self-complacent strain, had I per- 
mitted him to proceed, I cannot tell; but I was 
compelled to interrupt his congratulations, by in- 
forming him that the one thing of which his pro- 
duction had so thoroughly satisfied me was, not 
the authority of immersion, but the miserable and 
pitiable weakness of a cause which was driven from 
the fair field of Scripture argument to hunt through 
the volumes of Pzedo-baptists, and to tear out of 
their connection shreds of sentences and scraps of 
passages, in which, contrary to their general sen- 
timent and practice, a few of them had dropped 
some careless statement or candid concession, 
which the unscrupulous controversialist eagerly 
seized upon, and then strove to pervert into a kind 
of sanction to his peculiarities. ‘Yes, sir,’ I 


148 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


added, ‘I am satisfied that the stolen support 
thus brought to prop up a fabric of error, which 
cannot sustain itself, will only accelerate its fall. 
Such aid, the cause of truth can never require nor 
receive. But,’ I continued, “have you consid- 
ered the consequence of your method of maintain- 
ing immersion? You know that the eminent men 
whose names you have arrayed against their own 
practice and principles condemned the very course 
which your denomination has chosen, and them- 
selves pursued the opposite. If, then, you attach 
so much weight to their authority when it seems 
to be for you, you dare not disregard it when it is 
strongly against you ; and if a few single sentences 
apparently favourable to immersion are deemed so 
decisive, how can you reject the volumes and treat- 
ises directly against it, which so many of them haye 
written? Beware!” I said; “ you are brandishing 
a two-edged sword. You are bringing witnesses 
into court who will certainly put you out of it. 
You are receiving the testimony of men who, 
with one voice, reject your reasonings and renounce 
your practice. But yet Iam not surprised that 
the advocates of immersion should seize upon 
every scrap of evidence which may come to hand, 
and make so much of the little which they can find 
in the writings of wise and learned men to get the 


‘PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 149 


slightest countenance to their proceedings. It 
must be, I am aware, both a humiliation and a 
mortification for a Baptist to cast his eye over the 
shelves of a large theological library, and to find 
there scarcely a writer of any note or weight who 
has belonged to his denomination. With a few 
noble exceptions, the whole array of divines is 
against them. Where there is one eminent Bap- 
tist writer, there will be found a hundred on the 
opposite side. It is not wonderful, therefore, that 
your defenders should eagerly rake over the folios 
and fragments of fathers, reformers, prelates, pu- 
ritans, and non-conformists, in search of shreds and 
patches, torn from the consistent texture with 
which they were originally interwoven, in order to 
form what, after all, is but a scanty and ill-assorted 
coverlid for the bare system they were anxious to 
protect. But having obtained such small assist- 
ance to their cause, they would be wiser were they 
not to expose both its weakness and their own, by 
holding up, as they do, their ill-gotten gain to 
public gaze, and allowing all around them to see 
that it is miserably flimsy, and utterly worth- 
less.” rf 

I perceived that I had touched my visitor upon 
a tender place, and that he began to feel some 
jealousy for his own reputation as an author; 

13 * 


150 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


I therefore checked myself, and changed the 
topic. 

Our conversation, however, had not flowed in 
the new channel long before he suddenly inter- 
rupted it, by stating that he wished to say a 
word to me about what I had written to Mr. R. 
Having expressed my readiness to hear his re- 
marks, he proceeded to express his disapproba- 
tion of the course which I had selected, and was 
especially dissatisfied at my endeavouring to cireu- 
late my letter amongst the congregation. ‘If 
your own mind,” he said, “had been made up on 
the subject, why should you try to unsettle 
others? What good can itdo? I know several 
young persons who were quite decided upon the 
point, and would soon have been baptized, but 
who have been much disturbed by what you have 
written; and some of them, I am told, already 
begin to raise objections against God’s ordinance. 
I consider it wrong, sir,” he added, with much 
energy, ‘very wrong indeed, to draw away the 
thoughts of serious inquirers from the path of 
duty.” 

Although I could with difficulty conceal the satis- 
faction with which I heard this piece of intelligence, 
other emotions were still stronger, and I was un- 
able to resist the temptation to reply with more 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 151 


warmth and asperity, perhaps, than became me. 
“ With regard to myself,’ I said, “I am quite 
prepared to hear my motives misrepresented, and 
my conduct maligned, for having written to Mr. 
R., just as they were for taking the course which 
rendered that letter necessary. On this point I 
feel no concern, and shall offer no vindication. 
But how astonished I am, Mr. I. to hear you 
condemn me for calling the attention of others to 
the subject of baptism, when your minister and 
most of the members of the church (yourself in- 
cluded) are continually doing the same thing. 
You know well enough that no sooner do young 
persons in our congregation evince any serious- 
pess, and seem to be inquiring after salvation, 
than they are assailed on the subject of immer- 
sion, supplied with numerous tracts in support of 
the practice, and allowed no rest until they are 
under the water. Yes! and you know even more 
than this. You are well aware that some of our 
zealots for dipping do not confine their efforts to 
those who worship with them, but move heaven 
and earth to proselyte from other Christian bodies 
in the town.” “I then named two or three in- 
stances of this; and added, ‘It is notorious that 
complaints haye been repeatedly made by other 
pastors in the place of the efforts which persons in 


152 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


our congregation have put forth to draw from 
under their ministry young disciples whom they 
had been instrumental in bringing to the Saviour. 
Instead of seeking their society with a view to 
confirm their hearts in faith, and hope, and holi- 
ness, undue advantage has been taken of their in- 
experience to induce them to be immersed, In- 
stead of directing the eye of the half-awakened 
sinner upwards to the cross, it is pointed down- 
wards to the baptistery. Instead of fostering in 
such the conviction of sin, and confining their 
view to the Saviour, their serious thoughts have 
been diverted, and their early impressions dissi- 
pated by these proselyting efforts. Had immer- 
sion been the sacrament of salvation, it could not 
have been thrust into greater prominence, nor 
propagated with more zeal than it is by some in- 
dividuals whom we both well know. Nor are 
these parties exceptions to the general spirit and 
proceedings of your own denomination. In making 
immersion a term of Christian profession, and in 
many cases of communion, the Baptists invert 
the order of things established by the Saviour, 
fix the pyramid upon its point, and cherish 
habits of thought and feeling which dry up the 
sources of charity, and prevent the development 
of that magnanimity which pure religion pro- 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION 153 


duces. And it is notorious that, of all Chris- 
tian sects, the Baptists are the most prose- 
lyting. How strange, then—how marvellous— 
familiar as you are with such facts as these, 
that you should censure me for doing what 
your own people are so often chargeable with! 
But I thoroughly understand all this! To assail 
the faith of a Pzedo-baptist is perfectly right; but 
to inject a doubt into the mind of a Baptist is ex- 
tremely shocking! Try might and main to con- 
vert the one to immersion,—this is laudable; but 
touch the prejudices of the other, and, if you do 
not wish to be covered with hornets, and stung 
till you are frantic—flee !”” 

At first my worthy visitor demurred to my 
charges; but he soon deserted that ground, as 
if convinced that it was untenable, and said that 
Christians ought to contend earnestly for the 
faith once delivered to ‘the saints, and that 
“they should not suffer a single pin of the 
tabernacle to be removed from its place.” He 
then declared that his main objection to my 
letter was its spirit; and I requested him to 
name those parts ‘which he deemed improper. 
This he declined; and doubtful, from the manner 
in which he did so, whether he had seen what 
he censured, I pointedly put the question, and 


154 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


had my suspicion confirmed. Having expressed 
my surprise that he should condemn what he 
had never heard, he admitted that he had re- 
lied upon the representations of others; and 
further, as he was the father of a family, that 
he had determined that what he understood was 
a very dangerous production should not enter his 
house. 

Just as he made this ayowal, the thought oc- 
curred to me that, although I had seen in many 
of our friends’ dwellings controversial pieces in 
favour of adult immersion, I had never noticed a 
single work on the opposite side of the question. 
I said, therefore, that I supposed I had no greater 
cause for complaint than others who had written 
in support of the same opinion, and whose produc- 
tions, I doubted not, had been just as carefully 
withheld from his children. And I then inquired 
whether he himself had ever read a single defence 
of what he contemptuously termed “ infant sprink- 
ling ;”” and requested him, if he had, to name it. 
He professed that he had seen a good deal of what 
Peedo-baptists had to say for their practice; but 
he could not just then recollect the title or author 
of any particular volume of theirs which he had 
ever perused, and acknowledged that he had no 
such book in his possession. Other questions eli- 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 155 


cited the fact, of which my previous suspicion was 
strong, that his acquaintance with Pezedo-baptist 
publications was confined to the disjointed frag- 
ments and garbled extracts which he had met with 
in Baptist books and magazines. Similar cases, I 
well knew, were very common. Many strenuous 
sticklers for immersion, and some who were accus- 
tomed to denounce in strong language a different 
practice, would, I was satisfied, be found as igno- 
rant as this individual. And I thought then, and 
think still, that even authors might be named who 
could not possibly have read the writings to which 
they professed to reply. 

Not long after the conversation just described, 
Mr. B. called at my father’s house, and solicited 
a private interview. Supposing that he had come 
to controvert my opinions, and haying an indefina- 
ble sort of reverence for his person and office, 
which I had retained from my childhood, I rather 
shrunk from the interview; and should have felt 
far less restraint in discussing the baptismal ques- 
tion with many men of much greater skill. But 
he soon removed my nervousness, by stating that 
he simply wished to see me in reference to the 
Sabbath-school. And then, after some rather mys- 
terious generalities about the importance of my 
position as its superintendent, and the necessity 


156 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


of good fellowship between the teachers and my- 
self, he inquired whether, with my altered views 
on the subject of baptism, I did not deem it my 
duty to resign that office. As, in my great sim- 
plicity, I had never imagined that a difference of 
opinion on a mere form would disqualify me for 
the management of an institution designed, as [ 
supposed, to teach, not sectarian rites, but spiritual 
religion, I was confounded by the suggestion ; and, 
for a minute I felt as if I had been stunned. Ob- 
serving my astonishment, Mr. B. entreated me not 
to understand his question to imply the slightest 
dissatisfaction with the manner in which I had 
discharged the duties of my office. On the con- 
trary, he commended, in no measured terms, the 
order and efficiency which had resulted from my 
efforts, and acknowledged that the institution had 
never prospered so much as since I undertook its 
superintendence; but, he added, he now feared 
that ‘“‘the unhappy change’ in my sentiments 
would prevent in future that harmony which had 
existed hitherto between the teachers and myself. 
On this account alone, he assured me that some 
friends had suggested the propriety of my with- 
drawment, and that he agreed with their opinion. 

Had I yielded to the indignant feelings which 
this communication excited, I should have strongly 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 157 


expressed the shame and sorrow with which I re- 
garded such a display of bigotry and ingratitude, 
and should instantly have resigned my office. For 
more than four years I had devoted my best ener- 
gies, both on the Sabbath and during the week, 
to the business of the school. I had watched over 
its proceedings with the deepest interest, and with 
untiring diligence. And I had seen it rise from 
a state bordering upon extinction to such pros- 
perity that we numbered more children than any 
similar institution in the town. With the excep- 
tion of two elderly men, who had been in office 
prior to myself, and who were, therefore, opposed 
to all new measures, I had, as I believed, secured 
the confidence and esteem of the teachers; several 
of whom, and these the most intelligent and effi- 
cient amongst us, had been enlisted by my per- 
suasions. Indeed, so little reason had I for sup- 
posing that I was regarded with an unkind feeling, 
that, only a few months prior to the occurrences 
which have been narrated, they had a tea-meeting, 
at which Mr. B. presided, for the purpose of pre- 
senting me with a splendidly-bound copy of Cal- 
met’s Dictionary, as a testimonial of their regard. 

Strongly, however, as my feelings had been 
aroused by Mr. B.’s proposal, I was happily ena- 
bled to control them. I, therefore, simply expressed 

14 


158 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


my surprise that, on so slight a ground, and in so 
short a time, the views which he and others had 
formed of my fitness should have undergone so 
great a change; but I promised to give his sug- 
gestion my best consideration. Upon this he arose 
to depart; but, before he left the room, my 
thoughts glanced over the teachers of the school, 
and, as the names of one and another occurred to 
me, between whom and myself there had existed 
the most cordial regard, I could not resist the 
conviction that they were not parties to this petty 
persecution. I therefore asked Mr. B. whether a 
meeting had been held on the subject; and 
being answered in the negative, I inquired how he 
had ascertained their sentiments. These inter- 
rogatories elicited the fact, that the proposition 
submitted to me had originated with four or five 
individuals, who were church members, and yery 
rigid immersionists ; and that this cabal had con- 
trived to keep their fellow teachers in profound 
ignorance of their proceedings. I also suspected, 
what was subsequently confirmed, that the disunion 
which they feared was that which was expected 
to result from the influence of my opinions and 
proceedings upon others. I therefore told Mr. B. 
that as I had received office from the teachers, I 
would call them together at the earliest oppor- 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 159 


tunity, lay his suggestions before them, and act 
in accordance with their wishes. . 

This proposal was so reasonable, and yet so 
perilous, that it fairly nonplused my good pastor ; 
and, after a pause, he said that he would have 
some further communication with friends on the 
point, and hoped that, meanwhile, I would not call 
a teachers’ meeting, nor name to any one the sub- 
ject of our interview. 

It would not interest the reader, were I to detail 
the numerous schemes and unworthy proceedings 
with which the narrow-minded men, whose plans 
had been frustrated by my proposal to Mr. B., 
endeavoured to drive me from my post. Making 
up by diligence what they lacked in ability, I was 
at length so impeded and annoyed that I deemed 
it my duty to withdraw from the school; and what 
increased the pain of relinquishing engagements 
in which I had long taken great delight was the 
circumstance that, contrary to my earnest desire, 
several of the teachers would follow my example. 

This, however, was not the only annoyance to 
which I was exposed. Few days passed for two 
or three weeks in which I did not receive one or 
more anonymous letters,—most of them bitter and 
badly written, and, without one exception, convey- 
ing rather the spleen than the sentiments of their 


160 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


writers. The bulk of these I destroyed at the 
time ; but there were two or three which I con- 
sidered worth preservation, and these, although I 
little imagined then that such a destiny awaited 
them, shall now be presented to the publie. 

The first of these communications was the pro- 
duction of a very pragmatical pedagogue in our 
neighbourhood, who preached in a village a few 
miles from us, to a congregation consisting chiefly 
of his own pupils, and who had occasionally occu- 
pied Mr. B.’s pulpit. He was, however, by no 
means popular ; and his magniloquence, though at 
- first it astounded a few, at length disgusted all. 
To some it may seem incredible that a man could 
have written anything so absurd as the subjoined 
epistle ; but had they known the writer, or had 
they been but ten minutes in his company, all 
doubts upon this head would instantly vanish. 
The question of authorship, however, was not de- 
termined merely from internal evidence; but the 
sapient scribe was so well satisfied with his pro- 
duction, and so assured that it had settled and 
silenced me for ever, that, from sheer vanity, he 
could not keep his own secret. 


“‘Smr,—I have read your conceited and imper- 
tinent letter to Mr. R——; and I would not have 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 161 


worn out the knib of asingle goose-quill in ex- 
posing your folly, but that such stupidity as yours 
deserves the sharpest strokes of the ferule of 
truth. I am only sorry that I cannot make you 
stand upon the dunce’s form, with a fool’s cap 
upon your empty skull. 

“T should think it beneath me to answer your 
letter : it would be quite a degradation ; indeed, I 
have too much self-respect. Besides, it would only 
puff you up with more of that vanity which already 
makes you, in your own conceit, as big as a bal- 
loon, and as empty. You ought, sir, to be made 
to write the copy ‘Amend your manners,’ until 
you cried Peccavi. 

«You talk a great deal about John the Baptist 
and the apostles. Now, I should like to be in- 
formed what you can know of the capability of 
these mighty men of God. To say that John 
could only immerse so many in a day, and that 
the apostles, at Pentecost, found any, difficulty in 
getting water, or administering the holy ordinance 
to the three thousand, is quite absurd. It only 
betrays your ignorance. ‘This is the effect, sir, of 
pride. ‘Beware of philosophy and vain deceit.’ 
I almost fear you do not believe in the inspiration 
of the apostles. What! such men not able to bap- 
tize thousands in a day, or hundreds in an hour! 

14* 


162 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. ~ 


Do you not know that they could work miracles, 
and remove mountains? I repeat it,—’tis quite 
absurd. Jesus Christ told them that ‘all things 
were possible to him that believeth.’ Could they 

not, then, easily immerse thousands almost in no — 
time? There were giants on the earth in those 
days. I am quite ashamed of your ignorance. 
But I will not waste words upon one so wedded to 
his own opinion,—it would only be throwing pearls 
before swine. I shall leave you, therefore, to the 
remorse which you will one day feel for having 
rejected the counsel of God, and drawn away 
from the truth vain and giddy persons like your- 
self. I hope you will soon repent of this, your 


wickedness. 
“ Your well-wisher, 


‘ Magister Docet.” 


There was another literary curiosity, written, as 
I conjectured, by some young woman who was a 
recent convert to immersion. The phraseology is 
unchanged ; but I have corrected the orthography, 
and supplied the punctuation of the following ex- 
tract :-— 

“‘T was sorry that you should write so about the 
baptism in our chapel. ’*Twas a sweet season to 
me. AsI saw the young ladies standing at the 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 163 


side of the water, I thought to myself that they 
looked to me just like the shining ones in the 
pictures of Pilgrim’s Progress that stood upon the 
brink of the river; and then I thought how beau- 
tiful it must have been to see such a many as John 
baptized, all dressed in lily-white robes, like angels 
in heaven, by the river Jordan and the river 
Mnon,—and what a grand sight it must have 
been on the day of Pentecost! I never in my 
life saw the path of duty to be baptized so plain 
as I did then; and I was so convinced by that 
sweet sight that I thought I could stand back no 
longer.” * 

One other extract from these epistles must 
suffice. The writing was that of a female, and 
came, I suspected, from one of “ the young ladies” 
referred to in the preceding communication. 

“T can speak, sir, from experience, of the bene- 
fits of baptism. When I was baptized, I felt that 
T was buried with my Saviour. I shall never for- 
get that season. All your arguments, sir, and all 
the arguments in the world, will never turn me. 


* I should like to have had the ideas of my fair correspondent upon 
the altered appearance of the “shining ones,” as they emerged from 
the baptistery with their “lily-white robes” closely clinging to their 
bodies, rendering the movement of their limbs difficult and ungainly, 
and leaving a stream of the sacred element in their train. 


164 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


I would put my experience against them all. And 
if you, instead of disputing about baptism, had 
been baptized as I was, you would have been happy 
too. Many times have I thought of the precious 
words,— 


‘The holy eunuch, when baptized, 
Went on his way with joy; 
And who can tell what rapturous thoughts 
Did then his mind employ ?” 


“This was my experience; and I am sure I 
can use his language, and say, 


‘Blessed pool! in which I lately lay, 
And left my fears behind 

What an unworthy wretch am I! 
And God profusely kind,’ ” 


But other communications reached me at the 
same time, of a very different description, and 
which I deemed an ample compensation for all 
the censure which had been cast upon me! Of 
these, that which was to me the most interesting 
came from an estimable young man, whose history 
I will briefly sketch. He was an only child. 
His parents, who resided near the seacoast, about 
thirty miles from us, were influential members 
of an Independent church, and much esteemed 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 165 


for their works’ sake by members of other com- 
munities besides their own. ‘About five years 
before the time of which I write, they had ap- 
prenticed their son to a silversmith in our town, 
who was a member of the Baptist Church. Ho- 
nourable themselves, they never suspected that 
those under whose care they had placed him 
would take advantage of his youth, and exert the 
influence which they derived from their position, 
to make him a proselyte to immersion. No stipu- 
lation, indeed, had been made,—because they had 
not imagined that any such precautions would 
have been necessary, to restrain his master and 
mistress from tampering with him in order to 
attach him to their own party. But their confi- 
dence was misplaced. 

At an early period in his apprenticeship, and 
ere he had discovered any signs of seriousness, 
efforts were made to give his mind a Baptist bias. 
In this proceeding a danghter, some years older 
than himself, was the most active agent; but her 
parents were not idle. Frequently at supper, as 
I afterwards learned from his lips, the subject 
was introduced, and strong representations set 
forth of the duty of immersion, and the evils of a 
different mode of baptizing. It was not, there- 
fore, surprising that one so inexperienced should 


166 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


have become an easy convert to the opinions thus 
pressed upon his attention. 

I knew the young man well. He was a most 
regular attendant at our chapel, and a teacher in 
our school. His manners were gentle, and his 
habits retiring; but, as I thought I had observed 
a disposition to seek my company, I had re- 
peatedly, at the close of business on a summer 
evening, sauntered with him through the green 
lanes, and occasionally conversed on the sub- 
ject of personal religion. Although I was 
aware both of the opinions of his parents, and 
of the unwarrantable attempts which had been 
made to proselyte him, as he was not then a 
decided Christian, I carefully abstained from 
any reference to a subject so unsuited to his 
state of mind. More than once, indeed, he had 
alluded to the topic, and was evidently anxious to 
hear my sentiments upon it; but I adhered to 
my resolution. This course, however, in conse- 
quence of my own state of mind, and the indigna- 
tion with which I regarded the conduct of those 
with whom he dwelt, I found extremely difficult. 
Whether he understood my motive for acting 
thus, I cannot say; but his growing seriousness, 
and the increasing proofs of gratitude and affec- 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 167 


tion which I received from him, satisfied me of 
the propriety of the plan I had pursued. 

In this state our relations to each other con- 
tinued up to the period when I renounced my early 
views of baptism. But from that time there had 
been a very manifest change in his conduct. When 
we met on the Sabbath, indeed, his salutation and 
smile wore the same bland and affectionate cast as 
they had been wont to do; but instead, as before, 
of seeking my society, he evidently shunnedit. I 
was pained at this,—more so, I think, than by 
any other result of my altered opinions; for I 
knew him to be a generous and thoroughly inge- 
nuous youth, warm in his attachments, honourable 
in principle, and perfectly transparent in his gen- 
eral conduct. I resolved, therefore, to seize the 
first favourable opportunity which might be pre- 
sented for ascertaining, from himself, the cause of 
the change which I had noticed. This, however, 
was rendered unnecessary by the following letter, 
which he slid into my hand one Sabbath morning: 


“ My pear Frrenp,—For by this name I hope 
you will still permit me to call you, although I 
am fully convinced that I have forfeited all claim 
to that privilege. You must, I fear, have wondered 
much at my reserve and distance of late; and, 


168 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


when I reflect upon it, I am quite overwhelmed 
with shame, that I could have ever made such a 
return for the kindness I have received from you, 
and the good I have, I hope, derived from your 
conversation, * * * * JT could write much 
more on this subject, but I forbear. 

“T could also give you a long account of the - 
causes which induced me to act towards you as I 
have recently done; but as, in so doing, I should 
not only expose myself, but also others whose 
names I wish to conceal, I will not enter into par- 
ticulars. The fact is, that I heard such strong 
things said against you, and so many evil motives 
assigned to account for your change on the subject 
of immersion, that I almost believed what I am 
now convinced was utterly false, and thought that 
I ought to follow the advice of certain persons who 
earnestly persuaded me to shun your society. All 
the reparation I can now make for haying allowed 
myself to listen to such calumnies, and entertain 
such suspicions, is to confess my fault, which I do 
with sincere sorrow, and to crave your generous 
forgiveness. 

@But this is not the only purpose for which i 
have taken up my pen. Ido so both to convey 
information, and to ask for it. You are well aware 
that my dear parents are Independents ; and I may 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 169 


add, that, although most charitable towards other 
Christians, they are firm believers in infant bap- 
tism. I know, too, that they regard this ordi- 
nance as a great privilege, and, when rightly 
observed, very profitable both to parents and to 
children. Often have I heard them refer to the 
season when I was thus dedicated to God, as one 
of the most impressive of their lives; and I know 
that they look upon this service as an evidence of 
God’s special regard to the young, a striking sign 
of our need of the Holy Spirit’s influence, and a 
gracious pledge of his readiness to grant this bless- 
ing to them and to theirs. 

“But frequently as I have heard them make 
observations upon the practical importance of this 
service, they never, that I can recollect, treated of 
it in a controversial tone; and, therefore, when I 
entered my present situation, I was quite ignorant 
of the reasons by which Baptists and Independents 
support their respective opinions. In this state 
of ignorance, however, I did not continue long,— 
at least as to one side of the controversy. You 
are aware that Mr. and Mrs. A., and, indeed, all 
the family, are very strong Baptists; and it would 
be difficult for any one to be long in their house 
without making this discovery. At first, indeed, 
the subject was mentioned in my presence with 


15 


170 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


caution; but after a few months, I became rather 
weary of its frequent recurrence, and was occasion- 
ally pained to hear heavy reflections thrown out 
against the Christian denomination amongst whom 
I had been brought up. 

“ At that time, as I cared for none of those 
things, my impressions were but slight, and of 
short continuance. Still I often wondered that 
pious people like Mr. and Mrs. A. should talk so 
much to me upon such a subject, and should say 
scarcely anything respecting the state of my soul. 
Thus things continued until the beginning of last 
year, when more direct attempts were made to 
bring me to believe that immersion is the only 
proper mode of baptism, and, I am ashamed to 
add, with success. I say ‘ashamed,’ because I 
now perceive that I was led to this conclusion 
without anything like a fair investigation of the 
subject, and without seeking information, or even 
counsel, from my parents and former pastor. In- 
deed, to confess the truth, I had so far caught the 
spirit of those from whom I had received my im- 
pressions in favour of immersion as to conclude 
that not a word could be said in favour of a differ- 
ent practice, and that my beloved relations were 
only to be pitied, if not condemned, for the delu- 
sions under which they were held. This state of 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 171 


mind, together with the fear of giving them pain, 
in part restrained me from what I see now was my 
bounden duty. But I must add that, had not Mr. 
B. and my master persuaded me not to make any 
such communications, I scarcely think I should 
have acted as I did. 

“These were my circumstances, when I heard 
that you had expressed some doubts as to the duty 
of being immersed ; and, notwithstanding my pre- 
vious views of your character, I was brought to 
ascribe your conduct to pride, worldly-mindedness, 
and other unworthy motives. 

“This was my state of mind, though I had oc- 
easionally some misgivings as to its propriety, up 
to the time when a copy of your letter to Mr. R. 
came into my hands. What my feelings were after 
IT had read it, I will not attempt to describe. At 
first I was disposed to be angry. Your reasonings 
so completely struck from under me the ground 
upon which I had founded my belief in immer- 
sion, that I was both mortified at my own igno- 
rance, and vexed with you for having exposed it. 
But I have since read your letter repeatedly, and 
have carefully considered its arguments; and [ 
now write, not only to apologize for my unjust 
suspicions, but to thank you, which I do most 


172 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


sincerely, for the light you have thrown upon my 
mind. 

“Mr. and Mrs. A. do not know that I have 
seen what you have written, and, if they did, 
would be much displeased; for not only had they 
admonished me never to read what they described 
as a ‘wicked’ production, but expressed their de- 
termination not to allow it to enter their family. 
I believe, however, that they begin to suspect 
the truth, from my having hinted at one or two 
of your arguments against immersion, and asked 
how they could be answered. This was particu- 
larly the case a few evenings since, when Mr. B. 
supped at our house. But my queries brought 
me no satisfactory replies; indeed, I was fairly 
silenced by the evident surprise and displeasure 
with which they were received. Perhaps I ought 
to have been more candid; but I assure you that, 
although upon other points I can speak freely, 
the family with whom I reside are so sensitive 
on baptism, that I fear they would change their 
behaviour towards me entirely, did they know 
what I have now communicated to you. But I 
do not intend to maintain my reserve much 
longer. I think it right, however, to give the 
whole subject rather more consideration than I 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 173 


have yet done, before I express my decided 
opinion upon it; and I am particularly anxious 
to investigate one or two topics, upon which your 
letter does not touch. By far the most important 
of these has been so frequently stated in my hear- 
ing, and will, I am persuaded, be pressed with 
s0 much force when my doubts are discovered, 
that I will venture to solicit you to favour me 
with your views upon it. It is this,—If the 
word translated baptize does not mean to im- 
merse, can it be shown that it means to sprinkle 
or to pour? I never learned Greek, and cannot 
therefore ascertain this point for myself; but 
you, I doubt not, have considered it, and I shall 
therefore be thankful for the result of your re- 
flections. 

“T shall hope to see you soon; but for the 
present I would prefer a short reply to an inter- 


view. 
“Tam, &e.” 


“P, §.—You know Isaac, the porter at Messrs. 
L. & Co.’s, and I think you will be interested to 
hear a little concerning him. He came from the 
same town as I did, and at the time of his 
removal was under very strong religious con- 
victions. But he was then extremely ignorant, 


15* 


174 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. © 


and greatly required instruction on the essentials 
of the gospel. Instead, however, of obtaining 
what would have been so useful to him, he was 
beset by some of our zealous friends on the 
subject of baptism, who filled his mind with the 
opinion that immersion was the only scriptural 
mode of performing it, until he thought himself 
so much wiser than his former friends, and even 
minister, that, from being thoughtful and hum- 
ble, he became conceited and censorious. Kunow- 
ing his parents, and feeling some interest in his 
welfare, I have lately sought opportunity to speak 
with him on the subject, and to tell him some 
of the things which are contained in your letter. 
The effect has been so to shake his faith in 
his former opinions, and, what is better, in 
the infallibility of his instructors, that he seems 
ashamed of himself, and is, I hope, beginning to 
feel more than ever that ‘the kingdom of God 
is not meat and drink.’ If this were known, I 
fear I should be deemed as mischievous a person 
as yourself.” ‘ 

This letter, as might be supposed, gave me 
sincere satisfaction; and I was too much in-~ 
terested in the circumstances of my friend to 
delay my answer longer than necessary. [ 


'PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 175 


therefore, on the next day wrote the following 
reply :— 


“My prEaR ——.—“T sincerely thank you for 
your frank and friendly communication. It was 
as gratifying to me as it was honourable to your- 
self. I had remarked the change in your conduct 
towards me to which you refer; and I had also 
(tightly as I now learn,) conjectured the cause. 

“T candidly confess that I am much surprised at 
the stir which has been created by a circumstance 
so unimportant as my change of opinion on a point 
so little connected with the great purpose of life; 
but I am more than surprised, I am deeply grieved 
at the bitter feeling which this occurrence has ex- 
cited. I meet with some manifestation of it almost 
daily; and if I needed any additional reason for 
disbelieving the divine origin of immersion, I 
should find it in the unkind and unchristian spirit 
which it seems to foster in its advocates. I be- 
lieve that creeds, like characters, may be known 
by their fruits; but when I find a single religious 
rite, yea, the mere mode of administering that rite, 
raised into a prominence so disproportioned to its 
importance, and, instead of fostering spiritual ex- 
cellence, kindling unhallowed fires, I feel assured 
that it cannot be of God., 


176 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


‘But I will proceed to notice the topic upon 
which you solicit my sentiments. I have often 
heard the argument you have mentioned; and I 
did not advert to it in my letter to Mr. R., because 
it was not advanced in his sermon. But its refu- 
tation is most easy. Indeed, the objection (for 
argument it is not,) is only a bold assumption, 
which has been exposed and exploded a hundred 
times, but which the Baptists reproduce just as if 
it had never been answered, or was quite unan- 
swerable. I have called this ‘a bold assumption,’ 
but it would be more correct to describe it as a 
combination of such assumptions. It assumes, 
first, that the original word describes some mode 
of using water; secondly, that in this consists the 
very essence of baptism ; thirdly, that Independents 
agree with Baptists upon the former point; but, 
fourthly, that while admitting that the original 
word describes the mode of baptism, they main- 
tain that it does not mean to dip, but to pour or 
to sprinkle. All these advantageous points being 
seized, the conflict is short, and the victory sure. 
But there is nothing to which this theory corre- 
sponds more closely than it does to the Hindoo 
fable, which fixes the globe upon the back of an 
elephant, the elephant upon a tortoise, and the 
tortoise upon—nothing. Every assumption upon 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 177 


which the requirement you have named rests is 
false. Instead of admitting that the original word 
means to pour or sprinkle, Independents contend 
that it describes no mode of baptism whatever. 
They are well aware that, in some passages, it 
could no more be translated to sprinkle than to 
dip, to pour than to plunge; and they maintain 
that the term is used simply and solely to desig- 
nate a rite—an outward purification, without any 
reference whatever to the mode of its administra- 
tration. They consider that the word ‘baptize,’ 
when it does not designate the work of the Spirit, 
bears a general signification—just such as belongs 
to the expression ‘ sanctify,’ when used in connec- 
tion with the ceremonial observances of the Leviti- 
cal economy. The name, however, thus applied 
to these ceremonial sanctifications did not describe 
nor imply the mode of their administration, al- 
though sprinkling was that most in common use. 
But yet these very services Paul designates ‘ divers 
baptisms,’—a plain proof that he used the word, 
as I understand it, to signify a divine ordinance, 
but not the particular mode of its observance. 

“A little consideration will show you that 
there is a close correspondence between the words 
‘baptism’ and ‘Lord’s supper.’ The latter de- 
signation is far more descriptive than the former. 


178 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


Literally, it means a meal; indeed, the principal 
meal of the Jews. But who will maintain that 
the reception of a very small piece of bread, and a 
very small quantity of wine, answers to the exact 
meaning of the word? Is this to eat a supper? 
Nothing can be more evident than that the words 
‘Lord’s supper’ merely designate an ordinance, and 
do not describe the manner of its administration. 
Suppose, then, that the word baptism originally 
meant an immersion, as certainly as the word 
supper originally meant a meal, might not the 
one word be used as a general name of a religious 
service, without referring to the mode in which it 
was performed, equally with the other? And 
would not the supposition that it was so used be 
highly probable? If, then, all that Baptists say 
as to the original import of the disputed word 
was correct, it would go for nothing, unless they 
could overthrow the mass of proof which may 
be advanced to show that it must have lost its 
primary signification, and, like the term ‘sup- 
per,’ have become a mere name for a divine ordi- 
nance. All this is true, even supposing that 
the term did originally mean ‘dip and nothing 
but dip.’ This, however, is a false assump- 
tion, ‘the baseless fabric of a vision,’ which 


PROSELYTISM AND PERSECUTION. 179 


dissolves the moment the light of evidence is let 
in upon it ‘ 

“T cannot but fear that some Baptists, who 
require proof that the word in the New Testa- 
ment means ‘sprinkle,’ lay themselves open toa 
grave charge. If they know (and how can they 
be ignorant?) that Pzedo-baptists maintain what 
I have stated, viz., that the word has no reference 
to mode at all, they resort to an unworthy artifice, 
when they ask for evidence of the very point 
which is denied, and triumph as if they had ob- 
tained a victory, just because that is not esta- 
blished which was never affirmed. If, indeed, 
Independents asserted that Jbaptizo meant to 
sprinkle, just as Baptists assert that it means to 
immerse, then they might be fairly called upon 
to make good their theory. But when they 
contend that the term does not describe any 
mode, to require them to show the contrary, and 
thus to contradict themselves, and overthrow 
their own system, is certainly not very reason- 
able. 

“Hence, then, you will see how unfair the 
demand is respecting which you have sought my 
opinion. And you will further see, that the 
only evidence in support of any mode of baptism 
must be circumstantial. Upon that ground, I 


180 CONFESSIONS OF A CONVERT. 


have endeavoured to reason out the point in my 
letter to Mr. R.; and from it, I am confident, no 
opponent of immersion can be driven. 

“‘ With a sincere desire that you may be led to 
a correct conclusion on this and every other sub- 
ject, believe me, my dear friend,” &e. 


Iam in possession of many other facts, which 
would further illustrate the sentiments and spirit 
of some Baptists; but enough, I presume, has 
been written to show the weakness of the one, 
and the exclusiveness of the other. I will, 
therefore, bring my narrative to aclose. Fully 
convinced that Christian baptism, though not 
immersion, was both a duty and a privilege, 
and not having been dedicated to God in that 
ordinance during my infancy, I felt that it be- 
came me to fulfil this obligation immediately. 
I therefore applied for baptism to the Indepen- 
dent minister in our town, who readily acceded to 
my request by publicly administering to me that 
ordinance. 


THE END. 


) 
~e 


> Say Ale eh ls a Is" 


Y 


JUL2 5 


Demco 293-5 


Date Due 


ZLL8VSE LOG 


VNU I 


